linux-kernel - Re: lockdep complaints in slab allocator

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:	Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:28:22 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: lockdep complaints in slab allocator

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009, David Rientjes wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Matt Mackall wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid I have only anecdotal reports from SLOB users, and embedded
> > folks are notorious for lack of feedback, but I only need a few people
> > to tell me they're shipping 100k units/mo to be confident that SLOB is
> > in use in millions of devices.
> >
>
> It's much more popular than I had expected; do you think it would be
> possible to merge slob's core into another allocator or will it require
> seperation forever?

It would be possible to create a slab-common.c and isolate common handling
of all allocators. SLUB and SLQB share quite a lot of code and SLAB could
be cleaned up and made to fit into such a framework.

--
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/