linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] SLUB: revert direct page allocator pass through

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: <1232701464.6094.21.camel@penberg-laptop>
Date:	Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:04:24 +0200
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc:	cl@...ux-foundation.org, yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SLUB: revert direct page allocator pass through

On Friday 23 January 2009 19:43:20 Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> > From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
> >
> > This patch reverts page allocator pass-through logic from the SLUB
> > allocator.
> >
> > Commit aadb4bc4a1f9108c1d0fbd121827c936c2ed4217 ("SLUB: direct pass through
> > of page size or higher kmalloc requests")

On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 19:52 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Hmm, it lists quite a number of advantages that I guess are being
> reverted too? What was the test case(s) that prompted this commit
> in the first place? Better ensure it doesn't slow down...

Oh, I see I forgot to put an RFC in the patch subject line. I'm not
going to merge this just yet.

Christoph, suggestions on the test case?

--
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/