linux-kernel - Re: [patch] slub: default min_partial to at least highest cpus per node

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0904071316460.21748@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] slub: default min_partial to at least highest cpus per
  node

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> > If you think that's acceptable, I'd be just as satisfied with that approach
> > as long as all archs have valid cpu_to_node() mappings at the time of
> > CPU_UP_PREPARE.
> 
> Well, that doesn't change the current behavior, so sure, I think it's
> acceptable. And if the new defaults seem reasonable enough, we can probably
> get rid of the tunable altogether.
> 

I'd like to remove MAX_PARTIAL and replace it with nr_cpu_ids.

The tunable still makes sense to increase slowpath performance by avoiding 
the page allocator on machines where memory is abundant.  That remains 
unchanged from when I added it.

> AFAICT, the Documentation/ABI directory is the right place for this kind of
> stuff.
> 

Ok.
--
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/