Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 11:01:32 +0900 From: Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@...il.com> To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@...hat.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fork: dynamically allocate cache array for vmapped stacks using cpuhp On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@...il.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote: >>> On Sat 04-02-17 00:30:05, Hoeun Ryu wrote: >>>> Using virtually mapped stack, kernel stacks are allocated via vmalloc. >>>> In the current implementation, two stacks per cpu can be cached when >>>> tasks are freed and the cached stacks are used again in task duplications. >>>> but the array for the cached stacks is statically allocated by per-cpu api. >>>> In this new implementation, the array for the cached stacks are dynamically >>>> allocted and freed by cpu hotplug callbacks and the cached stacks are freed >>>> when cpu is down. setup for cpu hotplug is established in fork_init(). >>> >>> Why do we want this? I can see that the follow up patch makes the number >>> configurable but the changelog doesn't describe the motivation for that. >>> Which workload would benefit from a higher value? >>> >> >> The key difference of this implementation, the cached stacks for a cpu >> is freed when a cpu is down. >> so the cached stacks are no longer wasted. >> In the current implementation, the cached stacks for a cpu still >> remain on the system when a cpu is down. >> I think we could imagine what if a machine has many cpus and someone >> wants to have bigger size of stack caches. > > Then how about just registering a simple hotplug hook to free the > stacks without worrying about freeing the tiny array as well? > Michal, What do you think about it. it sounds fair enough. > --Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.