| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:59:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> cc: penberg@...helsinki.fi, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, hugh@...itas.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: SLUB defrag pull request? On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >> That is the impression that I got from you too. I have listed the options >> to get a reliable reference to an object and you seem to just skip over >> it. > > Because you don't _need_ a reliable reference to access the contents > of the dentry. The dentry is still there after being freed, as long > as the underlying slab is there and isn't being reused for some other > purpose. But you can easily ensure that from the slab code. With the two callbacks that I described that would take the global lock? That was already discussed before. Please read! It does not scale and the lock would have to be acquired before objects in a slab page are scanned and handled in any way. Without that locking any other processor can go into reclaim and start evicting the dentries that we are operating upon. Freeing in the slab sense means that a kfree ran to get rid of the object. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists