linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] mm: pack compound_dtor and compound

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: <20150818182214.GA21383@node.dhcp.inet.fi>
Date:	Tue, 18 Aug 2015 21:22:14 +0300
From:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] mm: pack compound_dtor and compound_order into one
 word in struct page

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 05:43:00PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 17-08-15 18:09:04, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > The patch halves space occupied by compound_dtor and compound_order in
> > struct page.
> > 
> > For compound_order, it's trivial long -> int/short conversion.
> > 
> > For get_compound_page_dtor(), we now use hardcoded table for destructor
> > lookup and store its index in the struct page instead of direct pointer
> > to destructor. It shouldn't be a big trouble to maintain the table: we
> > have only two destructor and NULL currently.
> > 
> > This patch free up one word in tail pages for reuse. This is preparation
> > for the next patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> 
> [...]
> > @@ -145,8 +143,13 @@ struct page {
> >  						 */
> >  		/* First tail page of compound page */
> >  		struct {
> > -			compound_page_dtor *compound_dtor;
> > -			unsigned long compound_order;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> > +			unsigned int compound_dtor;
> > +			unsigned int compound_order;
> > +#else
> > +			unsigned short int compound_dtor;
> > +			unsigned short int compound_order;
> > +#endif
> >  		};
> 
> Why do we need this ifdef? We can go with short for both 32b and 64b
> AFAICS.

My assumption was that operations on ints can be faster on some
[micro]arhictectures. I'm not sure if it's ever true.

> We do not use compound_order for anything else than the order, right?

Right.

> While I am looking at this, it seems we are jugling with type for order
> quite a lot - int, unsing int and even unsigned long.

Yeah. It's mess. I'll check if I can fix anything of it in v3.

-- 
 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/