Re: [PATCH] slab: deal with NULL pointers passed to kmem_cache_free

From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Wed Mar 21 2007 - 10:08:29 EST


On Wednesday, 21 March 2007 14:36, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > With __kmem_cache_free you would set #1 I hope, but if
> > nobody would use this - debugging time wouldn't change.
>
> I think you got it backwards. I suggested making the _current_
> kmem_cache_free() deal with NULL (so everyone will get it) and add a new
> optimized __kmem_cache_free() for those call-sites that really need it.
>
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > This could be acceptable, if there were no problems
> > with fixing the errors. But there are problems - bugs
> > like this aren't fixed on time - maybe because people
> > waste too much time per bug?
>
> You're barking up the wrong tree here, Jarek. I strongly feel that we
> should be more defensive in the slab for the exact reasons you outlined.
> There's bunch of bug reports people seem to dismiss as slab errors where
> in fact it's caused by a buggy caller.
>
> That said, Eric and Andrew make a good point about kmem_cache_free() being
> in super-hot paths which clearly must be addressed. The only reason
> holding me back is the fact that I don't know what those super-hot
> call-sites are (with the exception of network skb allocation) so I am
> really in no position to make that patch.

IMHO one way to find them is to actually slow down kmem_cache_free() and see
where the performance is hurt.

Greetings,
Rafael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/