linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] slub: only preallocate cpus_with

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: <1320606618.1428.76.camel@jaguar>
Date:	Sun, 06 Nov 2011 21:10:18 +0200
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>
Cc:	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] slub: only preallocate cpus_with_slabs if
 offstack

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> > I think if it is up to me, I recommend going the simpler  route that
> > does the allocation in flush_all using GFP_ATOMIC for
> > CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y and sends an IPI to all CPUs if it fails, because
> > it is simpler code and in the end I believe it is also correct.

On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 03:52 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> I support that. Pekka?

Sure. I'm OK with that. Someone needs to run some tests to make sure
it's working with low memory conditions when GFP_ATOMIC allocations
fail, though.

			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/