linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce bootmem

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2009 16:01:19 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	jeremy@...p.org, yinghai@...nel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	tglx@...utronix.de, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce bootmem_state

On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:34:01 -0800
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:

> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > 
> > Please, no.  system_state should be deprecated; its hard enough to have 
> > a notion of some kind of system-wide state, but putting subsystem 
> > specific substates into it just makes things worse.
> > 
> 
> Does it?  It seems to me to have a bunch of state variables which can 
> interact in $DEITY knows how many ways sounds like a bad idea.
> 

No, that's the whole point.  If each subsystem adds its own
subsystem-private state then the subsystems *won't* interact.

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