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:	Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:42:04 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Correct nr_processes() when CPUs have been unplugged


* Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > Sidenote: percpu areas currently are kept allocated on x86.
> 
> They must be kept allocated for all possible cpus. Arch code cannot 
> decide to not allocate per cpu areas.
> 
> Search for "for_each_possible_cpu" in the source tree if you want more 
> detail.

This has come up in the past. On-demand deallocation of percpu areas is 
a future possibility that might be useful - see previous percpu 
discussions on lkml for details.

All in one, the conclusion is that we dont want it yet (on-demand 
allocation of them is perfectly fine for now) - i just wanted to mention 
that this is a _current_ situation and an implementational choice, which 
judgement could change in the future.

The more 'virtual' our abstraction of CPUs becomes, the less the notion 
of permanent allocation will be acceptable as time goes on.

Dynamic allocation concepts are natural and the new, generic percpu 
allocator makes it more feasible to eventually deallocate percpu areas. 
(Of course various for_each_possible_cpu() assumptions will have to be 
fixed in that case.)

	Ingo
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ