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]

Date:	Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:07:25 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	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

Hi Hugh,

On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 13:38 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Fair enough that you jealously defend SL?B code from onslaught, but
> FWIW I strongly agree with Ben on all this.  I cannot see the point
> of the pain of moving around SL?B versus bootmem, if we immediately
> force such a distinction (differently dressed) upon their users again.

I'm fine with the current approach but I don't think this is completely
accurate. Passing a GFP flag from top to bottom (like we do in existing
code) is pretty natural compared to passing a "boot" boolean or using
system_state checks to switch between kmalloc() and bootmem_alloc().

So even with a GFP_BOOT flag, I do see advantages in being able to use
kmalloc() et al almost universally.

			Pekka

--
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/