linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm: slub allocation fairness

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.4.64.0705140929200.10801@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 May 2007 09:35:25 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm: slub allocation fairness

On Mon, 14 May 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 08:49 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > > Index: linux-2.6-git/include/linux/slub_def.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6-git.orig/include/linux/slub_def.h
> > > +++ linux-2.6-git/include/linux/slub_def.h
> > > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct kmem_cache {
> > >  	struct kmem_cache_node *node[MAX_NUMNODES];
> > >  #endif
> > >  	struct page *cpu_slab[NR_CPUS];
> > > +	int rank;
> > >  };
> > 
> > Ranks as part of the kmem_cache structure? I thought this is a temporary 
> > thing?
> 
> No it needs to store the current state to verity subsequent allocations
> their gfp flags against.

What state? This is a global state? The kmem_cache struct is rarely
written to after setting up the slab. Any writes could create a serious 
performance problem on large scale systems.

 
> > >   * Lock order:
> > > @@ -961,6 +962,8 @@ static struct page *allocate_slab(struct
> > >  	if (!page)
> > >  		return NULL;
> > >  
> > > +	s->rank = page->index;
> > > +
> > 
> > Argh.... Setting a cache structure field from a page struct field? What 
> > about concurrency?
> 
> Oh, right; allocate_slab is not serialized itself.

Nor should you ever write to the kmem_cache structure concurrently at all.

> > >  
> > > -	else {
> > > +	} else {
> > >  		object = page->lockless_freelist;
> > >  		page->lockless_freelist = object[page->offset];
> > >  	}
> > 
> > This is the hot path. No modifications please.
> 
> Yes it is, but sorry, I have to. I really need to validate each slab
> alloc its GFP flags. Thats what the whole thing is about, I thought you
> understood that.

You are accessing a kmem_cache structure field in the hot path. That 
cacheline is never used in the hot path. Sorry this is way to intrusive 
for the problem you are trying to solve.
-
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/