linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] CMA: generalize CMA reserved area management code

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:	Sat, 14 Jun 2014 12:55:39 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>
Cc:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] CMA: generalize CMA reserved area management code

Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com> writes:

> Currently, there are two users on CMA functionality, one is the DMA
> subsystem and the other is the kvm on powerpc. They have their own code
> to manage CMA reserved area even if they looks really similar.
> From my guess, it is caused by some needs on bitmap management. Kvm side
> wants to maintain bitmap not for 1 page, but for more size. Eventually it
> use bitmap where one bit represents 64 pages.
>
> When I implement CMA related patches, I should change those two places
> to apply my change and it seem to be painful to me. I want to change
> this situation and reduce future code management overhead through
> this patch.
>
> This change could also help developer who want to use CMA in their
> new feature development, since they can use CMA easily without
> copying & pasting this reserved area management code.
>
> v2:
>   Although this patchset looks very different with v1, the end result,
>   that is, mm/cma.c is same with v1's one. So I carry Ack to patch 6-7.
>
> Patch 1-5 prepare some features to cover ppc kvm's requirements.
> Patch 6-7 generalize CMA reserved area management code and change users
> to use it.
> Patch 8-10 clean-up minor things.


I wanted to test the ppc changes and found that the patch series doesn't apply
against v3.15 . Do you have a kernel tree which I can clone to test this
series ?

--
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/