linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] binder: Use kmem_cache for binder

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: <20190829064229.GA30423@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:42:29 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Peikan Tsai <peikantsai@...il.com>
Cc:     arve@...roid.com, tkjos@...roid.com, maco@...roid.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, christian@...uner.io,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] binder: Use kmem_cache for binder_thread

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 01:49:53PM +0800, Peikan Tsai wrote:
> Hi,

No need for that in a changelog text :)

> The allocated size for each binder_thread is 512 bytes by kzalloc.
> Because the size of binder_thread is fixed and it's only 304 bytes.
> It will save 208 bytes per binder_thread when use create a kmem_cache
> for the binder_thread.

Are you _sure_ it really will save that much memory?  You want to do
allocations based on a nice alignment for lots of good reasons,
especially for something that needs quick accesses.

Did you test your change on a system that relies on binder and find any
speed improvement or decrease, and any actual memory savings?

If so, can you post your results?

thanks,

greg k-h