linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] slab.c: remove branch hint

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0911300926150.14098@router.home>
Date:	Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:09:39 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	Tim Blechmann <tim@...ngt.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] slab.c: remove branch hint

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> OK, so it's the generic alloc_skb() function that keeps hitting
> kmem_cache_alloc_node() with "-1". Christoph, are you okay with removing the
> unlikely() annotation from __cache_alloc_node()?

Yes. Lets look for other cases in the allocators too.
kmem_cache_alloc_node used to be mainly used for off node allocations but
the network alloc_skb() case shows that this is changing now.

I hope the users of kmem_cache_alloc_node() realize that using -1 is not
equivalent to kmem_cache_alloc(). kmem_cache_alloc follows numa policies
for memory allocations. kmem_cache_alloc_node() does not.

--
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/