| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <E1KsviY-0003Mq-6M@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:38:54 +0200 From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> To: penberg@...helsinki.fi CC: miklos@...redi.hu, cl@...ux-foundation.org, 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 Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 00:10 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > Actually, no: looking at the slub code it already makes sure that > > objects are neither poisoned, nor touched in any way _if_ there is a > > constructor for the object. And for good reason too, otherwise a > > reused object would contain rubbish after a second allocation. > > There's no inherent reason why we cannot poison slab caches with a > constructor. Right, it just needs to call the constructor for every allocation. > > Come on guys, you should be the experts in this thing! > > Yeah, I know. Yet you're stuck with us. That's sad. No, I was a bit rude, sorry. I think the _real_ problem is that instead of fancy features like this defragmenter, SLUB should first concentrate on getting the code solid enough to replace the other allocators. Miklos -- 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