[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHKB1wJkkkq_yt88_XcrpoM74nhOEBAZuMZLwFkoXoeQQfin9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 10:54:07 +0200
From: Matteo Rizzo <matteorizzo@...gle.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, cl@...ux.com,
penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
corbet@....net, luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
jannh@...gle.com, evn@...gle.com, poprdi@...gle.com,
jordyzomer@...gle.com, ardb@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/14] x86: Create virtual memory region for SLUB
On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 23:50, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>
> I have the feeling folks just grabbed the first big-ish chunk they saw
> free in the memory map and stole that one. Not a horrible approach,
> mind you, but I have the feeling it didn't go through the most rigorous
> sizing procedure. :)
>
> My laptop memory is ~6% consumed by slab, 90% of which is reclaimable.
> If a 64TB system had the same ratio, it would bump into this 512GB
> limit. But it _should_ just reclaim thing earlier rather than falling over.
>
> That said, we still have gobs of actual vmalloc() space. It's ~30TiB in
> size and I'm not aware of anyone consuming anywhere near that much. If
> the 512GB fills up somehow, there are other places to steal the space.
>
> One minor concern is that the virtual area is the same size on 4 and
> 5-level paging systems. It might be a good idea to pick one of the
> holes that actually gets bigger on 5-level systems.
One of the other ideas that we had was to use the KASAN shadow memory instead of
a dedicated area. As far as I know the KASAN region is not used by anything else
when KASAN is disabled, and I don't think it makes sense to have both KASAN and
SLAB_VIRTUAL enabled at the same time (see the patch which introduces the
Kconfig option for why). The KASAN region is 16 TiB on 4-level systems and 8 PiB
on 5-level, in both cases 1/16th the size of the address space.
Could that work?
--
Matteo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists