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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:55:36 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> To: Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm/zsmalloc: change ZS_MAX_PAGES_PER_ZSPAGE Hello Joonsoo, On (02/18/16 17:28), Joonsoo Kim wrote: > 2016-02-18 12:02 GMT+09:00 Sergey Senozhatsky > <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>: > > ZS_MAX_PAGES_PER_ZSPAGE does not have to be order or 2. The existing > > limit of 4 pages per zspage sets a tight limit on ->huge classes, which > > results in increased memory wastage and consumption. > > There is a reason that it is order of 2. Increasing ZS_MAX_PAGES_PER_ZSPAGE > is related to ZS_MIN_ALLOC_SIZE. If we don't have enough OBJ_INDEX_BITS, > ZS_MIN_ALLOC_SIZE would be increase and it causes regression on some > system. Thanks! do you mean PHYSMEM_BITS != BITS_PER_LONG systems? PAE/LPAE? isn't it the case that on those systems ZS_MIN_ALLOC_SIZE already bigger than 32? MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS 36 _PFN_BITS 36 - 12 OBJ_INDEX_BITS (32 - (36 - 12) - 1) ZS_MIN_ALLOC_SIZE MAX(32, 4 << 12 >> (32 - (36 - 12) - 1)) != 32 -ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists