linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sunrpc: remove SLAB_MEM

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240227171353.GE277116@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:13:53 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>
Cc: trond.myklebust@...merspace.com, anna@...nel.org,
	chuck.lever@...cle.com, jlayton@...nel.org, neilb@...e.de,
	kolga@...app.com, Dai.Ngo@...cle.com, tom@...pey.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	vbabka@...e.cz, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
	Xiongwei.Song@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sunrpc: remove SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag usage

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 12:23:49PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> On 2024/2/24 21:51, chengming.zhou@...ux.dev wrote:
> > From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
> > 
> > The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag is already a no-op as of 6.8-rc1, remove
> > its usage so we can delete it from slab. No functional change.
> 
> Update changelog to make it clearer:
> 
> The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag used to be implemented in SLAB, which was
> removed as of v6.8-rc1, so it became a dead flag since the commit
> 16a1d968358a ("mm/slab: remove mm/slab.c and slab_def.h"). And the
> series[1] went on to mark it obsolete to avoid confusion for users.
> Here we can just remove all its users, which has no functional change.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240223-slab-cleanup-flags-v2-1-02f1753e8303@suse.cz/
> 
> Thanks!

Thanks Chengming Zhou,

As per my comment on a similar patch [*], this seems reasonable to me. But
I think it would be best to post a v2 of this patch with the updated patch
description (which is very helpful, BTW).

[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240227170937.GD277116@kernel.org/

> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
> > ---
> >  net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c b/net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c
> > index dcc2b4f49e77..910a5d850d04 100644
> > --- a/net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c
> > +++ b/net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c
> > @@ -1490,7 +1490,7 @@ int register_rpc_pipefs(void)
> >  	rpc_inode_cachep = kmem_cache_create("rpc_inode_cache",
> >  				sizeof(struct rpc_inode),
> >  				0, (SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT|
> > -						SLAB_MEM_SPREAD|SLAB_ACCOUNT),
> > +						SLAB_ACCOUNT),
> >  				init_once);

Also, while we are here, perhaps the indentation can be improved.
Something like:

	rpc_inode_cachep = kmem_cache_create("rpc_inode_cache",
				sizeof(struct rpc_inode),
				0, (SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT|
				    SLAB_ACCOUNT),
				init_once);

> >  	if (!rpc_inode_cachep)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
>