linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: slab: add basic slab module

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: <DD234804U7YK.3S2MBUJSFHF8J@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 20:15:23 +0200
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Elijah" <me@...jahs.space>
Cc: "Elijah Wright" <git@...jahs.space>, "Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@...nel.org>,
 "Alex Gaynor" <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, "Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
 "Gary Guo" <gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron
 <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>, "Andreas
 Hindborg" <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
 "Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Lorenzo Stoakes"
 <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@...e.cz>, "Liam R.
 Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, "Uladzislau Rezki" <urezki@...il.com>,
 <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: slab: add basic slab module

On Thu Sep 25, 2025 at 8:05 PM CEST, Elijah wrote:
> On 9/25/2025 10:43 AM, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>
>  > Anyways, I'd also like to hear some more opinions, especially 
> regarding (4), as
>  > mentioned.
>
> ok I just looked it over. I think (4) isn't really viable, the cache 
> pointer storage overhead is probably too much (in addition to some 
> complex issues).

Probably, given that kmemcache is meant to be used when we have a lot of (small)
allocations.

However, I'd like to hear from the MM folks, if there may be options in the
existing infrastructure, or if it's really a dead end.

What are the other complex issues you are referring to?

> I don't really like having a macro (so (3) basically) 
> and I think there are issues with non-static caches, I don't know 
> specifically though. obviously (1) doesn't work. (2) is exactly what I 
> was thinking specifically for rbtree. IMO the only useful options are 
> (2) and (3). I would say maybe implement (2) first and if you want 
> macro-generated ZST allocators they can wrap whatever that Box ends up 
> being.

I'm not sold on duplicating the Box code just yet. What issues are you referring
to?