linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/20] early_res: seperate common memmap func from e820.c to fw

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:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:37:20 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	yinghai@...nel.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org, hpa@...or.com,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20] early_res: seperate common memmap func from e820.c
 to fw_memmap.cy


* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:

> Ingo,
> 
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > ( Cc:-ed Andrew and Linus as this is a general design/policy matter wrt. 
> >   memory management. )
> > 
> > * David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
> > > Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:28:38 -0700
> > > 
> > > >> 
> > > >> That action means you absolutely don't value our feedback at all.
> > > > 
> > > > [PATCH 01/20] x86: add find_e820_area_node
> > > > is addressing your concern that early_res didn't handle memory cross the nodes problem.
> > > 
> > > Now I know that you _REALLY_ aren't listening to us.
> 
> > [ He has done a bit more than just to simply listen: he seems to
> > have written a patch which he thinks is addressing the concerns you
> > pointed out. It might not be the response you wished for (and it
> > might be inadequate) for but it sure gives me the impression of him
> > listening to you - unless by 'listening' you mean 'follow my exact
> > opinion without argument'. ]
> 
> I tend to disagree. Fixing the bug pointed out by Dave is not really a
> good argument about listening.
> 
> The main point is that there is still no answer why lmb cannot be used and 
> the reposted patch still is a full move of the x86 e820 functions into 
> kernel/fw_memmap.c.
> 
> That's not a generalization, that's simply a relocation of x86 code to 
> kernel/. And I agree with Dave and Ben that this is an useless exercise.

ok - i think you are right. Yinghai, mind having a look at using lib/lmb.c for 
all this?

	Ingo
--
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/