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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 14:30:11 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, llvm@...ts.linux.dev, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Handle ksize() vs __alloc_size by forgetting size On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:24:51PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > 2. Somehow statically computing the size-class's size (kmalloc_index() > might help here), removing __alloc_size from allocation functions and > instead use some wrapper. I don't think that's computable. I have been thinking about a slab flag that would say "speed is more important than size; if the smallest slab for this size of allocation has no free objects, search larger slabs to get memory instead of allocating a new slab". If we did have such a feature, it would be impossible to know how large ksize() would report.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists