linux-kernel - Re: [rfc][patch 2/3] slab: introduce SMP alignment

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: <20080311071330.GA20271@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:13:31 +0100
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 2/3] slab: introduce SMP alignment

On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 09:26:24PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Internode alignment is 4k. If you need an object aligned like that then it 
> may be better to go to the page allocator.

I never got a reply about this. Again: how can the modern slab allocator
avoid the need for internode alignment in order to prevent cacheline
pingpong on vsmp? Because I'm going to resubmit the SMP_ALIGN patch.

Also, the last I heard about the HWCACHE_ALIGN from you is that it didn't
make sense... I see it's merged now, which I appreciate, but I think it is
really important that we're on the same page here, so let me know if it
still doesn't make sense.

Thanks,
Nick

--
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/