[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1448558959.24696.91.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:29:19 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: use-after-free in sock_wake_async
On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 18:03 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> Also isn't the reason why slub exists so it can track memory regions
> per-cpu.
call_rcu() and kfree_rcu() will add a grace period (multiple ms) where
the cpu will likely evict from its caches the data contained in the
'about to be freed' objects, defeating the SLUB/SLAB ability to quickly
reuse a freed and hot object (LIFO)
This is one of the major RCU drawback : Force a FIFO behavior in object
reuse while LIFO one is much better for data locality, especially with
per-cpu lists.
Another problem is a slightly bigger working set size, which can hurt
some workloads that used to exactly fit cpu caches.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists