linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] make slab gfp fair

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:	Mon, 14 May 2007 09:37:42 -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 0/5] make slab gfp fair

On Mon, 14 May 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > Why does this have to handled by the slab allocators at all? If you have 
> > free pages in the page allocator then the slab allocators will be able to 
> > use that reserve.
> 
> Yes, too freely. GFP flags are only ever checked when you allocate a new
> page. Hence, if you have a low reaching alloc allocating a slab page;
> subsequent non critical GFP_KERNEL allocs can fill up that slab. Hence
> you would need to reserve a slab per object instead of the normal
> packing.

This is all about making one thread fail rather than another? Note that 
the allocations are a rather compex affair in the slab allocators. Per 
node and per cpu structures play a big role.


-
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/