linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] slab+slob: dup name string

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.2.00.1205230847580.29893@router.home>
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2012 08:48:48 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slab+slob: dup name string

On Tue, 22 May 2012, David Rientjes wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2012, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> > > I think that's precisely David's point: that we might want to destroy them
> > > eventually.
> >
> > Cannot imagine why.
> >
>
> We can't predict how slab will be extended in the future and this affects
> anything created before g_cpucache_cpu <= EARLY.  This would introduce the
> first problem with destroying such caches and is unnecessary if a
> workaround exists.

Changes to the very early bootstrap code of slab allocators are rare and
the code there is dicey anyways. It is much more risky to add additional
allocations of varying length at that stage.

--
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/