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, 21 Jul 2017 16:43:18 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>,
        zhaoyang.huang@...eadtrum.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, zijun_hu <zijun_hu@....com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zijun_hu@...o.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to
 cached_hole_size

On Fri 21-07-17 04:39:48, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 06:01:41PM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> > we just record the cached_hole_size now, which will be used when
> > the criteria meet both of 'free_vmap_cache == NULL' and 'size <
> > cached_hole_size'. However, under above scenario, the search will
> > start from the rb_root and then find the node which just in front
> > of the cached hole.
> > 
> > free_vmap_cache miss:
> >       vmap_area_root
> >           /      \
> >        _next     U
> >         /  (T1)
> >  cached_hole_node
> >        /
> >      ...   (T2)
> >       /
> >     first
> > 
> > vmap_area_list->first->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next
> >                   |-------(T3)-------| | <<< cached_hole_size >>> |
> > 
> > vmap_area_list->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next
> >                                | <<< cached_hole_size >>> |
> > 
> > The time cost to search the node now is T = T1 + T2 + T3.
> > The commit add a cached_hole_node here to record the one just in front of
> > the cached_hole_size, which can help to avoid walking the rb tree and
> > the list and make the T = 0;
> 
> Yes, but does this matter in practice?  Are there any workloads where
> this makes a difference?  If so, how much?

I have already asked this and didn't get any response. There were other
versions of a similar patch without a good clarification...

Zhaoyang Huang, please try to formulate the problem you are fixing and
why. While it is clear that you add _an_ optimization it is not really
clear why we need it and whether it might adversely affect existing
workloads. I would rather not touch this code unless there is a strong
justification for it.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ