linux-kernel - Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence

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:	Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:42:41 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
	cl@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence


> > Sure, I think we can do what you want with the patch below.
> 
> I don't really like adding branches to slab allocator like this.
> init code all needs to know what services are available, and
> this includes the scheduler if it wants to do anything sleeping
> (including sleeping slab allocations).
> 
> Core mm code is the last place to put in workarounds for broken
> callers...

Right, and that's also a reason why I decided for having that
"smellybits" approach since applying a mask is going to be a lot less
cycle consuming than a conditional branch (especially on small embedded
CPUs, the conditional branch on modern stuff should be be reasonably
harmless).

Nick, have you seen my patch ? What do you think ?

Cheers,
Ben.

--
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/