On Sun, 2021-11-07 at 18:45 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, 2021-11-04 at 11:28 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > > The consequence of sgx_nr_free_pages not being protected is that > > its value may not accurately reflect the actual number of free > > pages on the system, impacting the availability of free pages in > > support of many flows. The problematic scenario is when the > > reclaimer never runs because it believes there to be sufficient > > free pages while any attempt to allocate a page fails because there > > are no free pages available. The worst scenario observed was a > > user space hang because of repeated page faults caused by > > no free pages ever made available. > > Can you go in detail with the "concrete scenario" in the commit > message? It does not have to describe all the possible scenarios > but at least one sequence of events. I.e. I don't have anything fundamentally against changing it to atomic but the commit message is completely lacking the stimulus of changing anything. /Jarkko
