linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: make mem_map allocation continuous v2.

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]

Message-Id: <20080402192223.5e8754a0.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 2008 19:22:23 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	yhlu.kernel@...il.com
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel.send@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...ibm.com>, michael@...erman.id.au,
	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: make mem_map allocation continuous v2.

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:30:24 -0700 Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel.send@...il.com> wrote:

> v2 replace:
> 	[PATCH] mm: make mem_map allocation continuous.
> 	[PATCH] mm: allocate section_map for sparse_init
> 	[PATCH] mm: allocate usemap at first instead of mem_map in sparse_init
> 

err, no.

> 
> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
> index f6a43c0..2881222 100644
> --- a/mm/sparse.c
> +++ b/mm/sparse.c

Sorry, but I'd rather not do it this way.  We presently have this:

mm-make-mem_map-allocation-continuous.patch
mm-make-mem_map-allocation-continuous-checkpatch-fixes.patch
mm-fix-alloc_bootmem_core-to-use-fast-searching-for-all-nodes.patch
mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init.patch
mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-update.patch
mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-update-fix.patch
mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-powerpc-fix.patch
mm-offset-align-in-alloc_bootmem.patch
mm-make-reserve_bootmem-can-crossed-the-nodes.patch
mm-make-reserve_bootmem-can-crossed-the-nodes-checkpatch-fixes.patch

and you purport to throw some of them away and combine them into a single
patch?  We assume that the later patches will still apply and work on top
of this newer patch?  It is up to me to check that the replacement patch
incorporates the third-party changes to the original patches?

Too hard, too risky.  Can't we just do a fix against 2.6.25-rc8-mm1?
--
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/