linux-kernel - Re: SLUB defrag pull request?

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:	Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:14:41 +0300
From:	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	"Christoph Lameter" <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Miklos Szeredi" <miklos@...redi.hu>, 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, Oct 23, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Christoph Lameter
<cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Got a draft of a patch here that does freelist handling differently. Instead
> of building linked lists it uses free objects to build arrays of pointers to
> free objects. That improves cache cold free behavior since the object
> contents itself does not have to be touched on free.
>
> The problem looks like its freeing objects on a different processor that
> where it was used last. With the pointer array it is only necessary to touch
> the objects that contain the arrays.

Interesting. SLAB gets away with this because of per-cpu caches or
because it uses the bufctls instead of a freelist?
--
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/