linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: slab caches set to SLAB_MEM

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, 17 Nov 2011 10:11:07 -0500
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
To:	NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
Cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Amit Sahrawat <amit.sahrawat83@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: slab caches set to SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flags.

On Nov 17, 2011, at 12:35 AM, NamJae Jeon wrote:

> We prevent one node being concentrating workload from redundant
> alloc/free by balancing workload to other nodes in performance side.
> and we can avoid reclaim probability a little by allocation from only
> local node also.

Can you say more about this?   I'm afraid I don't understand what you
are trying to do here.

What I'm worried about is systems where the memory latency time for
local versus remote nodes might be 2-3 to 1.  That is, it takes 2-3 times
as much time to access memory on a remote node.   (On older machines,
the memory access time ratio's could have been as bad as 12:1 or 15:1.)

So accessing non-local memory can be a really, really big deal.  And this
isn't just theoretical, but have you considered what might happen on a 8
core AMD machine?

Regards,

-- Ted

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html