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. If this is on at compile time, but booted with sanitize_slab=off, is there a performance impact? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>