linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] mm: support parallel free of memory

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: <31665668-9885-6045-a314-8c092800c739@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:17:26 +0800
From:   Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] mm: support parallel free of memory

On 03/01/2017 08:43 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 02/28/2017 04:39 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> Dumb question: why not do this in userspace, presumably as part of the
>> malloc() library?  malloc knows where all the memory is and should be
>> able to kick off N threads to run around munmapping everything?
> 
> One of the places we saw this happen was when an app crashed and was
> exit()'ing under duress without cleaning up nicely.  The time that it
> takes to unmap a few TB of 4k pages is pretty excessive.
 
Thanks Dave for the answer, I should have put this in the changelog(will
do that in the next revision). Sorry about this Andrew, I hope Dave's
answer clears things up about the patch's intention.

Regards,
Aaron