linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 0/3] supplement of slab allocator removal

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20231203001501.126339-1-sxwjean@me.com>
Date:   Sun,  3 Dec 2023 08:14:58 +0800
From:   sxwjean@...com
To:     vbabka@...e.cz, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, cl@...ux.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
        roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, corbet@....net, keescook@...omium.org,
        arnd@...db.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Xiongwei Song <xiongwei.song@...driver.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] supplement of slab allocator removal

From: Xiongwei Song <xiongwei.song@...driver.com>

Hi,

Patch 1 is to remove an unused parameter. This patch actually is v3, but
it is not reasonable to add v3 tag in the cover letter, so I put the
change history inside the patch.

---
Patch 2 is to replace slub_$params with slab_$params.
Vlastimil Babka pointed out we should use "slab_$param" as the primary
prefix for long-term plan. Please see [1] for more information.

This patch is to do that. However, the patch is big, I'm not sure if
everything is proper in it, so I added "RFC" in the patch title. For more
information please see the commit message of patch.

I did the basic tests with qemu, which passed values by sl[au]b_max_order,
sl[au]b_min_order, sl[au]b_min_objects and sl[au]b_debug in command line.
The values looks correct by printing them out before calculating orders.

One thing I'm not sure about the forth parameter of __setup_param(),
Is it correct to set the parameter to 0 directly?

---
Patch 3 is not related to slab allocator removal. It's to correct the
description of default value of slub_min_objects in
Documentation/mm/slub.rst. 

---
CHANGES
v2:
- patch 1: Collect Reviewed-by tag.
- patch 3: Correct spelling mistakes in commit message.

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20231201031505.286117-1-sxwjean@me.com/

---
Regards,
Xiongwei

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/7512b350-4317-21a0-fab3-4101bc4d8f7a@suse.cz/

Xiongwei Song (3):
  Documentation: kernel-parameters: remove noaliencache
  mm/slub: unify all sl[au]b parameters with "slab_$param"
  mm/slub: correct the default value of slub_min_objects in doc

 .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         |  48 +++---
 Documentation/mm/slub.rst                     |   2 +-
 drivers/misc/lkdtm/heap.c                     |   2 +-
 mm/Kconfig.debug                              |   6 +-
 mm/slab.h                                     |  16 +-
 mm/slab_common.c                              |   8 +-
 mm/slub.c                                     | 142 +++++++++---------
 7 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 114 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1