On Tue, 22 Dec 2015, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 12/21/2015 07:40 PM, Laura Abbott wrote: > > + The tradeoff is performance impact. The noticible impact can vary > > + and you are advised to test this feature on your expected workload > > + before deploying it > > What if instead of writing SLAB_MEMORY_SANITIZE_VALUE, we wrote 0's? > That still destroys the information, but it has the positive effect of > allowing a kzalloc() call to avoid zeroing the slab object. It might > mitigate some of the performance impact.
We already write zeros in many cases or the object is initialized in a different. No one really wants an uninitialized object. The problem may be that a freed object is having its old content until reused. Which is something that poisoning deals with. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
