linux-kernel - Re: [Lhms-devel] [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [1/5] not-aligned memory hotadd handling fix

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:31:56 +0900
From:	Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc:	kmannth@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	lhms-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [1/5] not-aligned memory hotadd handling fix

> > > After Keith's report of memory hotadd failure, I increased test patterns.
> > > These patches are a result of new patterns. But I cannot cover all existing
> > > memory layout in the world, more tests are needed.
> > > Now, I think my patch can make things better and want this codes to be tested
> > > in -mm.patche series is consitsts of 5 patches.
> > 
> > I expect the code which these patches touch is completely untested in -mm, so
> > all we'll get is compile testing and some review.
> > 
> > Given that these patches touch pretty much nothing but the memory hot-add
> > paths I'd be inclined to fast-track them into 2.6.18.  Do you agree that
> > these patches are sufficiently safe and that the problems that they solve
> > are sufficiently serious for us to take that approach?
> > 
> > Either way, could I ask that interested parties review this work closely
> > and promptly?
> 
> Hmm. I reviewed them a bit, and I couldn't find any problems.
> 
> However, my ia64 box is same of his. And emulation environment is very
> close too. So, my perspective must be very similar from him.
> I think my review is not enough. Keith-san's test is better if he can.
> 
> Anyway, I'll test them with -mm. Something different environment
> may be good for test.

I tested them (includes 6/5) with -mm.
There is no regression on my emulation.

Acked-by: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>


-- 
Yasunori Goto 


-
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/