linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 01/14] slab: add opt-in caching layer of percpu sheaves

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: <ce289766-6d7d-427a-b9bb-8cb3634dbe9b@suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 10:51:34 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
 Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
 Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>, Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>,
 Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
 maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/14] slab: add opt-in caching layer of percpu sheaves

On 8/19/25 06:19, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> @@ -5624,20 +6561,29 @@ static int init_kmem_cache_nodes(struct kmem_cache *s)
>>
>>         for_each_node_mask(node, slab_nodes) {
>>                 struct kmem_cache_node *n;
>> +               struct node_barn *barn = NULL;
>>
>>                 if (slab_state == DOWN) {
>>                         early_kmem_cache_node_alloc(node);
>>                         continue;
>>                 }
>> +
>> +               if (s->cpu_sheaves) {
>> +                       barn = kmalloc_node(sizeof(*barn), GFP_KERNEL, node);
>> +
>> +                       if (!barn)
>> +                               return 0;
>> +               }
>> +
>>                 n = kmem_cache_alloc_node(kmem_cache_node,
>>                                                 GFP_KERNEL, node);
>> -
>>                 if (!n) {
>> -                       free_kmem_cache_nodes(s);
> 
> Why do you skip free_kmem_cache_nodes() here?

It's not necessary as the caller will perform __kmem_cache_release() which
calls free_kmem_cache_nodes()

I have incorporated your other suggestions, thanks!