linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] zsmalloc: support zsmalloc to ARM, MIPS, SUPERH

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:	Thu, 17 May 2012 18:08:13 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] zsmalloc: support zsmalloc to ARM, MIPS, SUPERH

On 05/17/2012 05:32 PM, Paul Mundt wrote:

> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:05:17AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> About local_flush_tlb_kernel_range,
>> If architecture is very smart, it could flush only tlb entries related to vaddr.
>> If architecture is smart, it could flush only tlb entries related to a CPU.
>> If architecture is _NOT_ smart, it could flush all entries of all CPUs.
>> So, it would be best to support both portability and performance.
>>
> ..
> 
>> Need double check about supporting local_flush_tlb_kernel_range
>> in ARM, MIPS, SUPERH maintainers. And I will Ccing unicore32 and
>> score maintainers because arch directory in those arch have
>> local_flush_tlb_kernel_range, too but I'm very unfamiliar with those
>> architecture so pass it to maintainers.
>> I didn't coded up dumb local_flush_tlb_kernel_range which flush
>> all cpus. I expect someone need ZSMALLOC will implement it easily in future.
>>
> 
> One thing you might consider is providing a stubbed definition that wraps
> to flush_tlb_kernel_range() in the !SMP case, as this will extend your
> testing coverage for staging considerably.
> 
> Once you exclude all of the non-SMP platforms, you're left with the
> following:
> 
> 	- blackfin: doesn't count, no TLB to worry about.
> 	- hexagon: seems to imply that the SMP case uses thread-based
> 	  CPUs that share an MMU, so no additional cost.
> 	- ia64: Does a global flush, which already has a FIXME comment.
> 	- m32r, mn10300: local_flush_tlb_all() could be wrapped.
> 	- parisc: global flush?
> 	- s390: Tests the cpumask to do a local flush, otherwise has a
> 	  __tlb_flush_local() that can be wrapped.
> 	- sparc32: global flush
> 	- sparc64: __flush_tlb_kernel_range() looks like a local flush.
> 	- tile: does strange hypervisory things, presumably global.
> 	- x86: has a local_flush_tlb() that could be wrapped.
> 
> Which doesn't look quite that bad. You could probably get away with a
> Kconfig option for optimized local TLB flushing or something, since
> single function Kconfig options seem to be all the rage these days.


I missed this sentence.

Thanks for very helpful comment, Paul!

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

--
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/