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:	Tue, 27 Nov 2012 11:15:27 +0800
From:	Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	wujianguo <wujianguo106@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	rob@...dley.net, isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, linfeng@...fujitsu.com, jiang.liu@...wei.com,
	yinghai@...nel.org, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	minchan.kim@...il.com, mgorman@...e.de, rientjes@...gle.com,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	wujianguo@...wei.com, qiuxishi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] page_alloc: Bootmem limit with movablecore_map

At 11/26/2012 11:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin Wrote:
> On 11/26/2012 05:15 AM, Tang Chen wrote:
>>
>> Hi Wu,
>>
>> That is really a problem. And, before numa memory got initialized,
>> memblock subsystem would be used to allocate memory. I didn't find any
>> approach that could fully address it when I making the patches. There
>> always be risk that memblock allocates memory on ZONE_MOVABLE. I think
>> we can only do our best to prevent it from happening.
>>
>> Your patch is very helpful. And after a shot look at the code, it seems
>> that acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() is an architecture dependent
>> function. Could we do this somewhere which is not depending on the
>> architecture ?
>>
> 
> The movable memory should be classified as a non-RAM type in memblock,
> that way we will not allocate from it early on.

Hi, hpa

The problem is that:
node1 address rang: [18G, 34G), and the user specifies movable map is [8G, 24G).
We don't know node1's address range before numa init. So we can't prevent
allocating boot memory in the range [24G, 34G).

The movable memory should be classified as a non-RAM type in memblock. What
do you want to say? We don't save type in memblock because we only
add E820_RAM and E820_RESERVED_KERN to memblock.

Thanks
Wen Congyang

> 
> 	-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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ