|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 11:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > >> Is is possible to do the call to security_sk_alloc() in the ip_init() function >> or does the per-cpu nature of the socket make this a pain? >> > > Its a pain, if we want NUMA affinity. > > Here, each cpu should get memory from its closest node. I really really don't like it. I won't say NAK, but it is the first and only place in the kernel where I believe we allocate an object and don't allocate the security blob until some random later point in time. If it is such a performance issue to have the security blob in the same numa node, isn't adding a number of branches and putting this function call on every output at least as bad? Aren't we discouraged from GFP_ATOMIC? In __init we can use GFP_KERNEL. This still doesn't fix these sockets entirely. We now have the security blob allocated, but it was never set to something useful. Paul, are you looking into this? This is a bandaide, not a fix.... -Eric -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
[Fedora Users] [Fedora Legacy] [Fedora Desktop] [Yosemite Photos] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Campsites] [KDE Users] [Gnome Users]