linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] implement dynamic percpu 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: <499CA834.4080208@kernel.org>
Date:	Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:30:44 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com, jeremy@...p.org,
	cpw@....com, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] implement dynamic percpu allocator

Tejun Heo wrote:
>   One trick we can do is to reserve the initial chunk in non-vmalloc
>   area so that at least the static cpu ones and whatever gets
>   allocated in the first chunk is served by regular large page
>   mappings.  Given that those are most frequent visited ones, this
>   could be a nice compromise - no noticeable penalty for usual cases
>   yet allowing scalability for unusual cases.  If this is something
>   which can be agreed on, I'll pursue this.

I've given more thought to this and it actually will solve most of
issues for non-NUMA but it can't be done for NUMA.  Any better ideas?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/