linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc

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, 16 Apr 2010 11:07:55 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Bob Liu <lliubbo@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Minchan Kim wrote:

> I don't want to remove alloc_pages for UMA system.

alloc_pages is the same as alloc_pages_any_node so why have it?

> #define alloc_pages alloc_page_sexact_node
>
> What I want to remove is just alloc_pages_node. :)

Why remove it? If you want to get rid of -1 handling then check all the
callsites and make sure that they are not using  -1.

Also could you define a constant for -1? -1 may have various meanings. One
is the local node and the other is any node. The difference is if memory
policies are obeyed or not. Note that alloc_pages follows memory policies
whereas alloc_pages_node does not.

Therefore

alloc_pages() != alloc_pages_node(  , -1)

--
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/