linux-kernel - Re: rhashtable: Use __vmalloc with GFP

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:	Wed, 9 Dec 2015 03:42:48 +0100
From:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
	wfg@...ux.intel.com, lkp@...org
Subject: Re: rhashtable: Use __vmalloc with GFP_ATOMIC for table allocation

On 12/09/15 at 10:38am, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 03:36:32AM +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > 
> > Without knowing your exact implementation plans: introducing an
> > additional reference indirection for every lookup will have a
> > huge performance penalty as well.
> > 
> > Is your plan to only introduce the master table after an
> > allocation has failed?
> 
> Right, obviously the extra indirections would only come into play
> after a failed allocation.  As soon as we can run the worker thread
> it'll try to remove the extra indirections by doing vmalloc.

OK, this sounds like a good compromise. The penalty is isolated
for the duration of the atomic burst.
--
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/