linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 00/10] vfs: getname/putname overhaul

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120908153836.GK16230@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Sat, 8 Sep 2012 17:38:36 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	eparis@...hat.com, linux-audit@...hat.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/10] vfs: getname/putname overhaul

> I could see that allocating out of the slab would mean less waste when
> you have >4k pages, but why would it be faster than just allocating a
> page directly?

The slab allocator is far more optimized than the page allocator 
for the fast path (in fact page could need some major diet in its fast path)

At least that was the established wisdom some time ago, haven't recently
rechecked it.


> Also, by "track separately" do you mean that you think I should drop
> patch 9 in this series and just do two allocations for a getname in all
> cases?

Just meant what you already do in the patchkit.

-Andi


-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/