linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm: Use slab_list list

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: <20190312020153.GJ9362@eros.localdomain>
Date:   Tue, 12 Mar 2019 13:01:53 +1100
From:   "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "Tobin C. Harding" <tobin@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm: Use slab_list list_head instead of lru

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:22:23AM +0000, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 04:16:33PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:49:23PM +0000, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > The patchset looks good to me, however I'd add some clarifications
> > > why switching from lru to slab_list is safe.
> > > 
> > > My understanding is that the slab_list fields isn't currently in use,
> > > but it's not that obvious that putting slab_list and next/pages/pobjects
> > > fields into a union is safe (for the slub case).
> > 
> > It's already in a union.
> > 
> > struct page {
> >         union {
> >                 struct {        /* Page cache and anonymous pages */
> >                         struct list_head lru;
> > ...
> >                 struct {        /* slab, slob and slub */
> >                         union {
> >                                 struct list_head slab_list;     /* uses lru */
> >                                 struct {        /* Partial pages */
> >                                         struct page *next;
> > 
> > slab_list and lru are in the same bits.  Once this patch set is in,
> > we can remove the enigmatic 'uses lru' comment that I added.
> 
> Ah, perfect, thanks! Makes total sense then.
> 
> Tobin, can you, please, add a note to the commit message?
> With the note:
> Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>

Awesome, thanks.  That's for all 4 patches or excluding 2?

thanks,
Tobin.