linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] percpu_counter: Fix __percpu_counter

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 8 Dec 2008 15:07:24 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, dada1@...mosbay.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, cmm@...ibm.com,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu_counter: Fix __percpu_counter_sum()

On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 18:00:47 -0500
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 11:20:35PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > atomic_t is pretty good on all archs, but you get to keep the cacheline
> > ping-pong.
> > 
> 
> Stupid question --- if you're worried about cacheline ping-pongs, why
> aren't each cpu's delta counter cacheline aligned?

They are allocated with alloc_percpu(), so each CPU's counter lives
in a per-cpu area.  If you chase through seventeen layers of Rustyness
you end up at mm/allocpercpu.c:percpu_populate() which is where that
little s32 ends up getting allocated.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html