linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/9] mm: implement split page table lock for PMD level

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130913142543.95200E0090@blue.fi.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Sep 2013 17:25:43 +0300 (EEST)
From:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
	"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Robin Holt <robinmholt@...il.com>,
	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] mm: implement split page table lock for PMD level

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 04:06:15PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > +#if USE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCKS
> > +
> > +static inline void pgtable_pmd_page_ctor(struct page *page)
> > +{
> > +	spin_lock_init(&page->ptl);
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> > +	page->pmd_huge_pte = NULL;
> > +#endif
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void pgtable_pmd_page_dtor(struct page *page)
> > +{
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> > +	VM_BUG_ON(page->pmd_huge_pte);
> > +#endif
> > +}
> > +
> > +#define pmd_huge_pte(mm, pmd) (virt_to_page(pmd)->pmd_huge_pte)
> > +
> > +#else
> 
> So on -rt we have the problem that spinlock_t is rather huge (its a
> rtmutex) so instead of blowing up the pageframe like that we treat
> page->pte as a pointer and allocate the spinlock.
> 
> Since allocations could fail the above ctor path gets 'interesting'.
> 
> It would be good if new code could assume the ctor could fail so we
> don't have to replicate that horror-show.

Okay, I'll rework this.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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/