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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 12:00:54 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>, Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/40] mm: kmem_cache_objsize On Fri, 4 May 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote: > He is not able to calculate it just using the object size since he does > not know where the slab put the slab management structure. And in case of > SLUB there is no slab management structure... Which means he would have to > special case based on the slab allocator selected. Let me state this once more: he is interested in _rough approximation_. It makes no sense to me to add this kind of fuzzy logic in the slab. Now, as the slab clearly cannot give a _precise number_ either, it shouldn't be added there. But, if both of you really want to stick it in mm/slab.c, I guess I won't be too violently opposed to it. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Pekka - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists