linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31

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: <20090615112827.GC6012@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:28:28 +0200
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	yinghai@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:22:05PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 08:39:48PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> But I won't live with having it shit in our nice core code...
> Well, at least I won't throw up my hands and give up this
> early.

Just the principle, btw. The cost of this one load and
branch (when moved out to the slowpath -- in the fastpath
then adding a single cycle is like a 1% slowdown you know)
is not prohibitive, but it's a slipperly slope.

If a couple of specialised early boot code places have
to test slab_is_available() to prevent crap leaking into
our main allocators, then that's quite fine by me.

--
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/