linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] SLUB updates for 2.6.25

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]

Date:	Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:10:49 +1100
From:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	clameter@....com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] SLUB updates for 2.6.25

On Tuesday 05 February 2008 09:30, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 14:28:45 -0800
>
> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > root (1):
> > >       SLUB: Do not upset lockdep
> >
> > err, what?  I though I was going to merge these:
> >
> > slub-move-count_partial.patch
> > slub-rename-numa-defrag_ratio-to-remote_node_defrag_ratio.patch
> > slub-consolidate-add_partial-and-add_partial_tail-to-one-function.patch
> > slub-use-non-atomic-bit-unlock.patch
> > slub-fix-coding-style-violations.patch
> > slub-noinline-some-functions-to-avoid-them-being-folded-into-alloc-free.p
> >atch
> > slub-move-kmem_cache_node-determination-into-add_full-and-add_partial.pat
> >ch
> > slub-avoid-checking-for-a-valid-object-before-zeroing-on-the-fast-path.pa
> >tch slub-__slab_alloc-exit-path-consolidation.patch
> > slub-provide-unique-end-marker-for-each-slab.patch
> > slub-avoid-referencing-kmem_cache-structure-in-__slab_alloc.patch
> > slub-optional-fast-path-using-cmpxchg_local.patch
> > slub-do-our-own-locking-via-slab_lock-and-slab_unlock.patch
> > slub-restructure-slab-alloc.patch
> > slub-comment-kmem_cache_cpu-structure.patch
> > slub-fix-sysfs-refcounting.patch
> >
> > before you went and changed things under my feet.
>
> erk, sorry, I misremembered.   I was about to merge all the patches we
> weren't going to merge.  oops.

While you're there, can you drop the patch(es?) I commented on
and didn't get an answer to. Like the ones that open code their
own locking primitives and do risky looking things with barriers
to boot...

Also, WRT this one:
slub-use-non-atomic-bit-unlock.patch

This is strange that it is unwanted. Avoiding atomic operations
is a pretty good idea. The fact that it appears to be slower on
some microbenchmark on some architecture IMO either means that
their __clear_bit_unlock or the CPU isn't implemented so well...
--
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/