linux-kernel - Re: [patch02/05]: Containers(V2)- Generic Linux kernel changes

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:	Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:44:29 -0700
From:	Rohit Seth <rohitseth@...gle.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	CKRM-Tech <ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net>, devel@...nvz.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch02/05]: Containers(V2)- Generic Linux kernel changes

On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 13:27 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Rohit Seth <rohitseth@...gle.com> writes:
> >  					 */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CONTAINERS
> > +	struct container_struct *ctn; /* Pointer to container, may be NULL */
> > +#endif
> 
> I still don't think it's a good idea to add a pointer to struct page for this.

I thought last time you supported adding a pointer to struct page (when
you mentioned next gen slab will also consume page->mapping).  May be I
missed your point.

> This means any kernel that enables the config would need to carry this significant
> overhead, no matter if containers are used to not.
> 
Sure this is non-zero overhead but I think this is the logical place to
track the memory.

> Better would be to store them in some other data structure that is only
> allocated on demand or figure out a way to store them in the sometimes
> not all used fields in struct page.
> 

which one...I think the fields in page structure are already getting
doubly used. 

> BTW your patchkit seems to be also in wrong order in that when 02 is applied
> it won't compile.

Not sure if I understood that.  I've myself tested these patches on
2.6.18-rc6-mm2 kernel and they apply just fine.  Are you just trying to
apply 02....if so then that wouldn't suffice.

-rohit

-
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/