netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/3] rhashtable: better high order allocation attempts

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: <20150220143120.GE4586@casper.infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 20 Feb 2015 14:31:20 +0000
From:	"tgraf@...g.ch" <tgraf@...g.ch>
To:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:	'Eric Dumazet' <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	'Daniel Borkmann' <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"johunt@...mai.com" <johunt@...mai.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] rhashtable: better high order allocation attempts

On 02/20/15 at 02:27pm, David Laight wrote:
> I presume this code is allocating very large arrays for the base of the hash lists.
> Since there is no absolute requirement for contiguous KVA (nothing
> sequentially accesses the entire array) it can be coded differently.
> 
> I realize that this would involve an extra data cache line access.
> So you'd want to avoid it for small tables.
> (I expected this to be your objection)

We can consider switching over to flex arrays at some point
although NUMA considerations seem much more important to me
at this point.
--
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