linux-kernel - Re: Patch workqueue: create new slab cache instead of hacking

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, 21 Mar 2012 10:03:07 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: Patch workqueue: create new slab cache instead of hacking

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> Creating a dedicated cache for few objects ? Thats a lot of overhead, at
> least for SLAB (no merges of caches)

Its some overhead for SLAB (a lot is what? If you tune down the per cpu
caches it should be a couple of pages) but its none for SLUB. Maybe we
need to add the merge logic to SLAB?

Or maybe we can extract a common higher handling level for kmem_cache
from all slab allocators and make merging standard.
--
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/