Linux cgroups development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Harry Yoo <harry@kernel.org>
To: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
	 Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	 Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	 Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org,  linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@suse.de>,
	 Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@google.com>,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 2/8] ipc, msg: Account msg_msg allocations with GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT again
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2026 21:39:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ask5kpMS4mpI8Api@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <asjhg2e4-WSeKuXd@thinkpad>

On Fri, Oct 09, 2026 at 04:22:03PM +0200, Harry Yoo wrote:
> And now I see the initial kmem_buckets design did not sufficiently
> tackle the question "How this should work when kmem_buckets falls back
> to kmalloc?"
> 
> I suppose the kmem_buckets' abstraction should not be too tightly
> coupled with kmalloc caches. Creating a kmem_buckets should be
> conceptually equivalent to creating a set of caches with speicifc
> slab flags, size, align, useroffset/size. (for variable size allocation).

Just to clarify... I have a few concerns on this area.

1. Complexity.

It's very counter-intuitive to understand how it works when
SLAB_BUCKETS is not compiled. My brain cannot easily process two
different implementations w/ and w/o SLAB_BUCKETS.

A "compatibility layer" allows us to assume certain expectations
and ignore all implementation details when SLAB_BUCKETS is not compiled.

2. Making kmem_buckets tightly coupled with kmalloc's implementation
   details is not reasonable.

Let's say, at some point we make SLAB_BUCKETS always enabled and drop
the config option. Then all kmem_buckets users will now have certain
assumptions inherted from kmalloc (e.g. alignment), which is not
reasonable.

3. __GFP_ACCOUNT and __GFP_DMA should be applied to all allocations
in the slab cache. For kmalloc, these flags are only used to select
the kmalloc cache (which has equivalent SLAB_* flags for __GFP_ACCOUNT
or __GFP_DMA) to serve the allocation.

Specifying it on individual allocations (rather than as SLAB_ flags)
makes it easy to break the assumption.

> When it falls back to kmalloc, kmem_buckets itself should provide a
> compatibility layer when falling back to kmalloc.

For example, calculate_sizes() converts certain SLAB_* flags into
GFP flags (s->allocflags) for allocation. We can have a similar
logic when falling back to kmalloc.

Though current implementation does not allow this and requires
some rework.

-- 
Cheers,
Harry / Hyeonggon

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-09 19:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-06  9:20 [PATCH net-next v6 0/8] net: skb: isolate skb data area allocations into a separate bucket Kees Cook
2026-10-06  9:20 ` [PATCH net-next v6 2/8] ipc, msg: Account msg_msg allocations with GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT again Kees Cook
2026-10-09 14:22   ` Harry Yoo
2026-10-09 19:39     ` Harry Yoo [this message]
2026-10-06  9:20 ` [PATCH net-next v6 7/8] mm/slab: Provide kmalloc type fallback for bucket allocations Kees Cook
2026-10-08 21:25 ` [PATCH net-next v6 0/8] net: skb: isolate skb data area allocations into a separate bucket Harry Yoo
2026-10-09  6:36   ` Kees Cook
2026-10-09  7:02   ` Vlastimil Babka

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ask5kpMS4mpI8Api@thinkpad \
    --to=harry@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuniyu@google.com \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=pfalcato@suse.de \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox