linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add movablecore

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:53:25 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	wency@...fujitsu.com, linfeng@...fujitsu.com, rob@...dley.net,
	isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	jiang.liu@...wei.com, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	minchan.kim@...il.com, mgorman@...e.de, rientjes@...gle.com,
	yinghai@...nel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add movablecore_map boot option.

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:27:21 +0800
Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com> wrote:

> This patchset provide a boot option for user to specify ZONE_MOVABLE memory
> map for each node in the system.
> 
> movablecore_map=nn[KMG]@ss[KMG]
> 
> This option make sure memory range from ss to ss+nn is movable memory.
> 1) If the range is involved in a single node, then from ss to the end of
>    the node will be ZONE_MOVABLE.
> 2) If the range covers two or more nodes, then from ss to the end of
>    the node will be ZONE_MOVABLE, and all the other nodes will only
>    have ZONE_MOVABLE.
> 3) If no range is in the node, then the node will have no ZONE_MOVABLE
>    unless kernelcore or movablecore is specified.
> 4) This option could be specified at most MAX_NUMNODES times.
> 5) If kernelcore or movablecore is also specified, movablecore_map will have
>    higher priority to be satisfied.
> 6) This option has no conflict with memmap option.

This doesn't describe the problem which the patchset solves.  I can
kinda see where it's coming from, but it would be nice to have it all
spelled out, please.

- What is wrong with the kernel as it stands?
- What are the possible ways of solving this?
- Describe the chosen way, explain why it is superior to alternatives

The amount of manual system configuration in this proposal looks quite
high.  Adding kernel boot parameters really is a last resort.  Why was
it unavoidable here?
--
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/