Re: [PATCH] mm/slub: disable slab merging in the default configuration

[Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 03:21:31PM +0200, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> Make CONFIG_SLAB_MERGE_DEFAULT default to n unless CONFIG_SLUB_TINY is
> enabled. Benefits of slab merging is limited on systems that are not
> memory constrained: the overhead is negligible and evidence of its
> effect on cache hotness is hard to come by.
> 
> On the other hand, distinguishing allocations into different slabs will
> make attacks that rely on "heap spraying" more difficult to carry out
> with success.
> 
> Take sides with security in the default kernel configuration over
> questionnable performance benefits/memory efficiency.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julian Pidancet <julian.pidancet@oracle.com>
> ---
> In an attempt to assess the performance impact of disabling slab
> merging, a timed linux kernel compilation test has been conducted first
> using slab_merge, then using slab_nomerge. Both tests started in an
> identical state.  Commodity hardware was used: a laptop with an AMD Ryzen
> 5 3500U CPU, and 16GiB of RAM. The kernel source files were placed on
> an XFS partition because of the extensive use of slab caches in XFS.
> 
> The results are as follows:
> 
>       | slab_merge       | slab_nomerge     |
> ------+------------------+------------------|
> Time  | 489.074 ± 10.334 | 489.975 ± 10.350 |
> Min   |          459.688 |          460.554 |
> Max   |          493.126 |          494.282 |
> 
> The benchmark favors the configuration where merging is disabled, but the
> difference is only ~0.18%, well under statistical significance.

As mentioned, please include these kinds of perf notes in the commit
log; it's useful to see later. :)

Regardless, yes, please. I have been running slab_nomerge on all my
systems for years and years now.

With the typo fixed and commit log updated, please consider this:

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook