linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: page_counter: rearrange struct page

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: <CALvZod4whYX+0ZuCGgyKuG-Q_9d0g7N_x+=WXOeB_1TM=3Q7vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 09:04:59 -0700
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>,
        Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
        Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org,
        Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: page_counter: rearrange struct page_counter fields

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:15 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon 22-08-22 08:06:14, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> [...]
> > > >  struct page_counter {
> > > > +     /*
> > > > +      * Make sure 'usage' does not share cacheline with any other field. The
> > > > +      * memcg->memory.usage is a hot member of struct mem_cgroup.
> > > > +      */
> > > > +     PC_PADDING(_pad1_);
> > >
> > > Why don't you simply require alignment for the structure?
> >
> > I don't just want the alignment of the structure. I want different
> > fields of this structure to not share the cache line. More
> > specifically the 'high' and 'usage' fields. With this change the usage
> > will be its own cache line, the read-most fields will be on separate
> > cache line and the fields which sometimes get updated on charge path
> > based on some condition will be a different cache line from the
> > previous two.
>
> I do not follow. If you make an explicit requirement for the structure
> alignement then the first field in the structure will be guarantied to
> have that alignement and you achieve the rest to be in the other cache
> line by adding padding behind that.

Oh, you were talking explicitly about _pad1_, yes, we can remove it
and make the struct cache align. I will do it in the next version.