linux-kernel - Re: [patch] SLQB slab 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]

Message-ID: <20090123151525.GL19986@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:15:25 +0100
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] SLQB slab allocator

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 04:06:32PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 03:27:53PM +0100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >  
> > > Although I think I would prefer alloc_percpu, possibly with
> > > per_cpu_ptr(first_cpu(node_to_cpumask(node)), ...)
> > 
> > I don't think we have the NUMA information available early enough
> > to do that. 
> 
> How early? At mem_init time it should be there because bootmem needed
> it already. It meaning the architectural level NUMA information.

node_to_cpumask(0) returned 0 at kmem_cache_init time.

 
> > OK, but if it is _possible_ for the node to gain memory, then you
> > can't do that of course. 
> 
> In theory it could gain memory through memory hotplug.

Yes.

 
> > The cache_line_size() change wouldn't change slqb code significantly.
> > I have no problem with it, but I simply won't have time to do it and
> > test all architectures and get them merged and hold off merging
> > SLQB until they all get merged.
> 
> I was mainly refering to the sysfs code here.

OK.


> > > Could you perhaps mark all the code you don't want to change?
> > 
> > Primarily the debug code from SLUB.
> 
> Ok so you could fix the sysfs code? @)
> 
> Anyways, if you have such shared pieces perhaps it would be better
> if you just pull them all out into a separate file. 

I'll see. I do plan to try making improvements to this peripheral
code but it just has to wait a little bit for other improvements
first.

--
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/