linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] greatly reduce SLOB external fragmentation

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:	Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:25:20 +0100
From:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] greatly reduce SLOB external fragmentation

On Thu, 10 January 2008 11:49:25 -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
> b) grouping objects of the same -type- (not size) together should mean
> they have similar lifetimes and thereby keep fragmentation low
> 
> (b) is known to be false, you just have to look at our dcache and icache
> pinning.

(b) is half-true, actually.  The grouping by lifetime makes a lot of
sense.  LogFS has a similar problem to slabs (only full segments are
useful, a single object can pin the segment).  And when I grouped my
objects very roughly by their life expectency, the impact was *HUGE*!

In both cases, you want slabs/segments that are either close to 100%
full or close to 0% full.  It matters a lot when you have to move
objects around and I would bet it matters even more when you cannot move
objects and the slab just remains pinned.

So just because the type alone is a relatively bad heuristic for life
expectency does not make the concept false.  Bonwick was onto something.
He just failed in picking a good heuristic.  Quite likely spreading by
type was even a bonus when slab was developed, because even such a crude
heuristic is slightly better than completely randomized lifetimes.

I've been meaning to split the dentry cache into 2-3 seperate ones for a
while and kept spending my time elsewhere.  But I remain convinced that
this will make a measurable difference.

Jörn

-- 
Never argue with idiots - first they drag you down to their level,
then they beat you with experience.
-- unknown
--
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/