| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 13:52:41 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: improve e820_search_gap() Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 01:15:38PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Andi Kleen wrote: >>> "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com> writes: >>>> Why blindly? Aren't hotpluggable memory ranges supposed to be reserved >>>> in the E820 map? >>> They are supposed to be reserved in SRAT, but not in e820. >> Ah, okay. Perhaps we should fold this information into our internal >> "e820" map? If so I guess the question is how soon we can do that. > > You could do that or just query SRAT too, but ... > > The problem is really that there are still systems which have hidden > holes which are not reserved anywhere. When I last hacked on the gap algorithm > it triggered subtle bugs. So this will never be fully reliable. > That's without a question. However, as far as querying SRAT, I don't like the idea of spreading the knowledge of the system memory map out between a bunch of different places, each of which have a little piece of the puzzle. It puts a huge onus on the user to know what mechanisms are actually available, and really makes a shitty interface. -hpa -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists