netdev - Re: [PATCH 00/28] Swap over NFS -v16

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1204287533.6243.105.camel@lappy>
Date:	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:18:53 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/28] Swap over NFS -v16


On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 13:58 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> >  I made page->reserve into PG_emergency and made that bit stick for the
> >  lifetime of that page allocation. I then made kmem_is_emergency() look
> >  up the head page backing that allocation's slab and return
> >  PageEmergency().
> 
> [snip]
> 
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> >  This is a stricter model than I had before, and has one ramification I'm
> >  not entirely sure I like.
> >
> >  It means the page remains a reserve page throughout its lifetime, which
> >  means the slab remains a reserve slab throughout its lifetime. Therefore
> >  it may never be used for !reserve allocations. Which in turn generates
> >  complexities for the partial list.
> 
> Hmm, so why don't we then clear the PG_emergency flag then 

Clearing PG_emergency would mean kmem_is_emergency() would return false
in kfree_reserve() and fail to un-charge the object.

Previously objects would track their account status themselves (when
needed) and freeing PG_emergency wouldn't be a problem.

> and allocate a new fresh page to the reserves?

Not sure I understand this properly. We would only do this once the page
watermarks are high enough, so the reserves are full again.

> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> >  Does this sound like something I should pursuit? I feel it might
> >  complicate the slab allocators too much..
> 
> I can't answer that question until I see the code ;-). But overall, I
> think it's better to put that code in SLUB rather than trying to work
> around it elsewhere. The fact is, as soon as you have some sort of
> reservation for _objects_, you need help from the SLUB allocator.

Well, I agree with that consolidating it makes sense. And like I said,
it gives pretty code. However, it also puts the burden of this feature
on everyone and might affect performance - still its only the slow path,
but still.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html