linux-kernel - Re: SLUB 0:1 SLAB (OOM during massive parallel kernel builds)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710240955480.26202@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: SLUB 0:1 SLAB (OOM during massive parallel kernel builds)

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> Yeah, but we're _not failing_ when debugging is enabled. Thus, it's
> likely, that the _failing_ (non-debug) case has potential for more
> order 0 allocs, no? I am just guessing here but maybe it's
> slab_order() behaving differently from calculate_slab_order() so that
> we see more order 0 pressure in SLUB than SLAB?

Seesm that order 0 pressure is better than order 1?


-
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/