linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, slab: Extend vm/drop

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:   Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:33:41 +0000
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To:     Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
CC:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, slab: Extend vm/drop_caches to shrink kmem slabs

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 03:32:28PM +0000, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> 
> > so that objects belonging to different memory cgroups can share the same page
> > and kmem_caches.
> >
> > It's a fairly big change though.
> 
> Could this be done at another level? Put a cgoup pointer into the
> corresponding structures and then go back to just a single kmen_cache for
> the system as a whole?
> You can still account them per cgroup and there
> will be no cleanup problem anymore. You could scan through a slab cache
> to remove the objects of a certain cgroup and then the fragmentation
> problem that cgroups create here will be handled by the slab allocators in
> the traditional way. The duplication of the kmem_cache was not designed
> into the allocators but bolted on later.
> 

Yeah, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Idk how big the performance
penalty will be for small and short-living objects, it should be measured.
But for long-living objects it will be much better for sure...

Thanks!