linux-kernel - Re: [patch 02/41] cpu alloc: The allocator

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:	Fri, 6 Jun 2008 10:32:47 +1000
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 02/41] cpu alloc: The allocator

On Thursday 05 June 2008 01:11:00 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Mike Travis a écrit :
> > I'm a bit confused.  Why is DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED() conditioned
> > on ifdef MODULE?
> Because we had crashes when loading oprofile module, when a previous
> version of oprofile used to use DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED variable
>
> module loader only takes into account the special section ".data.percpu"
> and ignores ".data.percpu.shared_aligned"
>
> I therefore submitted two patches :

Put one way, putting page-aligned per-cpu data in a separate section is a 
space-saving hack: one which is not really required for modules because of 
the low frequency of such variables.  Put another way, not respecting 
the .data.percpu.shared_aligned section in modules is a bug.

But a comment would probably be nice!

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/