linux-kernel - Re: [slub p4 1/7] slub: free slabs without holding locks (V2)

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:	Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:58:50 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [slub p4 1/7] slub: free slabs without holding locks (V2)

On Sat, 20 Aug 2011, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> > static void free_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct kmem_cache_node *n)
> > {
>
> Is it possible to somehow verify that we're the last thread using the cache
> when SLUB debugging is enabled? It'd be useful for tracking down callers that
> violate this assumption.

Hmmm... We do not track "threads" using slabs. I do not really know what
the "thread" entity that would access a slab is? A subsystem? A kernel
thread? A user thread? All these can access any slab at any time.

--
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/