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]
Date:	Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:21:31 +0100
From:	"David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	"Jesper Dangaard Brouer" <brouer@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Hannes Frederic Sowa" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [net-next PATCH 0/4] net: frag patchset for fixing LRU scalabilityissue

> I have dropped the idea of doing "direct hash cleaning".  Instead I
> have simply choosen to solve the global LRU list problem, by making
> the LRU list be per CPU.

How can a per-cpu LRU list work?
I see two immediate problems:
- Ensuring the normal 'allocate' and 'free' are always done
  on the same cpu (free will need to remove items from any
  LRU list).
- Ensuring that there all the items aren't on the LRU lists
  of other cpus - meaning one can't be allocated.

The only way this could work is if the allocation limit
is also per-cpu and you can guarantee that the alloc and
free for any given item will always happen on the same cpu.

(alloc as in 'add to LRU list, free as in 'remove from LRU list).

	David

Powered by blists - more mailing lists