linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 8/8] Reduce inode memory usage for systems with a high MAX

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701161249400.3074@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:51:14 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
cc:	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>,
	Dave Chinner <dgc@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 8/8] Reduce inode memory usage for systems with a high
 MAX_NUMNODES

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Paul Menage wrote:

> I was thinking runtime, unless MAX_NUMNODES is less than 64 in which
> case you can make the decision at compile time.
> 
> > 
> > If done at compile time then we will end up with a pointer to an unsigned
> > long for a system with <= 64 nodes. If we allocate the nodemask via
> > kmalloc then we will always end up with a mininum allocation size of 64
> > bytes.
> 
> Can't we get less overhead with a slab cache with appropriate-sized objects?

Ok but then we are going to have quite small objects. Plus we will have 
additional slab overhead per node.
-
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/