linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] IB: decrease large contigous allocation

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: <20180926184809.5d37cdb7@virtuozzo.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 18:48:09 +0300
From:   Jan Dakinevich <jan.dakinevich@...tuozzo.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
        Mark Bloch <markb@...lanox.com>,
        Daniel Jurgens <danielj@...lanox.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Kamal Heib <kamalheib1@...il.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Denis Lunev <den@...tuozzo.com>,
        Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@...tuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] IB: decrease large contigous allocation

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 08:46:23 -0600
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:03:42PM +0300, Jan Dakinevich wrote:
> > The size of mlx4_ib_device became too large to be allocated as
> > whole contigous block of memory. Currently it takes about 55K. On
> > architecture with 4K page it means 3rd order.
> > 
> > This patch series makes an attempt to split mlx4_ib_device into
> > several parts and allocate them with less expensive kvzalloc
> 
> Why split it up? Any reason not to just allocate the whole thing with
> kvzalloc?
> 

To allocate whole ib_device with kvmalloc I will need replace kzalloc()
by kvzalloc() in ib_alloc_device() and then review allocation, to make
sure that no one uses this memory for DMA.

Although, I could introduce new ib_*alloc_device allocator for these
needs...

> Jason



-- 
Best regards
Jan Dakinevich