linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.25-rc7-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.24

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803281247270.14670@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	penberg@...helsinki.fi, clameter@....com, rjw@...k.pl,
	pstaszewski@...com.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bunk@...nel.org, protasnb@...il.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc7-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.24



On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> It would be better if we actually passed in the gfp_flags, and then we 
> could test the __GFP_HIGH bit rather than the page address.  But for now, 
> the rule is that GFP_ATOMIC and __GFP_ZERO do not work together, because 
> this sanity test currently cannot work for that case.

Gaah. Sadly, we don't actually have any reasonably sane way of doing that. 

So I guess we'll have to lose the coverage of kmap_atomic() in other 
places, even though the only case where this was worth losing it for was 
that one clear_highpage() call site :/

		Linus
--
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/