linux-kernel - Re: SLUB regression in current Linus

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.2.00.1105251003150.23309@router.home>
Date:	Wed, 25 May 2011 10:04:05 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SLUB regression in current Linus

On Wed, 25 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> >
> > So simply return the object. In the debug case we do not need all the other
> > processing that unlock_out: does.
>
> So that patch looks like it should explain things.
>
> But exactly why don't we need the ->tid update and the ALLOC_SLOWPATH
> stats? Both of them would seem to be equally valid for the debug case.

We always fall back to the slow path in the debug case. So the tid update
is useless.

ALLOC_SLOWPATH would just be incremented for all allocations. Also a
pretty useless thing.

--
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/