linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/12] mm, slub: lower the default slub_max_order with CONFIG_SLUB

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 17:16:17 -0800
From:   Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] mm, slub: lower the default slub_max_order with
 CONFIG_SLUB_TINY

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 06:11:55PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> With CONFIG_SLUB_TINY we want to minimize memory overhead. By lowering
> the default slub_max_order we can make slab allocations use smaller
> pages. However depending on object sizes, order-0 might not be the best
> due to increased fragmentation. When testing on a 8MB RAM k210 system by
> Damien Le Moal [1], slub_max_order=1 had the best results, so use that
> as the default for CONFIG_SLUB_TINY.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/6a1883c4-4c3f-545a-90e8-2cd805bcf4ae@opensource.wdc.com/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>

Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>

Thanks!