linux-kernel - Re: SLUB 0:1 SLAB (OOM during massive parallel kernel builds)

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:	Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:04:03 +0300
From:	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>
Cc:	"Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SLUB 0:1 SLAB (OOM during massive parallel kernel builds)

Hi,

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > With SLAB this workload never went to OOM killer.
> > With SLUB and pretty much all debugging enabled, it finishes to the end
> > (albeit slowly).
> > With SLUB and no debugging, OOM killer kicks in.

On 10/23/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
> Not sure what this is. Maybe the slowing SLUB solves the race.

What kind of race are you thinking of? What I initially thought was
that the problem is that SLUB messes up some other VM heuristics due
to different object sizes, not holding on to empty slabs, and/or page
allocator pass-through. I guess only object size is affected by
debugging, though?
-
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/