linux-kernel - Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0906121006540.15809@gentwo.org>
Date:	Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:07:57 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, npiggin@...e.de
Subject: Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> The problem here is that it's not enough that we make GFP_RECLAIM_MASK a
> variable. There are various _debugging checks_ that happen much earlier
> than that. We need to mask out those too which adds overhead to
> kmalloc() fastpath, for example.

True. The GFP_RECLAIM_MASK only addresses the passing of gfp flags from a
derived allocator to the page allocator. It will deal only with the issue
of GFP_WAIT handling.


--
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/