linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/2] bootmem: Revert "mm: fix boundary checking in free_bootmem

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: <86802c440804121855g2a8da2yee02c64daddad9a5@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:55:41 -0700
From:	"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@...urebad.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Yasunori Goto" <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>,
	"KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] bootmem: Revert "mm: fix boundary checking in free_bootmem_core"

On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de> wrote:
> This reverts commit 5a982cbc7b3fe6cf72266f319286f29963c71b9e.
>
>  The intention behind this patch was to make the free_bootmem()
>  interface more robust with regards to the specified range and to let
>  it operate on multiple node setups as well.
>
>  However, it made free_bootmem_core()
>
>   1. handle bogus node/memory-range combination input by just
>      returning early without informing the callsite or screaming BUG()
>      as it did before
>   2. round slightly out of node-range values to the node boundaries
>      instead of treating them as the invalid parameters they are
>
>  This was partially done to abuse free_bootmem_core() for node
>  iteration in free_bootmem (just feeding it every node on the box and
>  let it figure out what it wants to do with it) instead of looking up
>  the proper node before the call to free_bootmem_core().

it seems intel having one box the [0, 4G), [8, 12G] on node 0, and
[4G, 8G) and [12G, 16) on node 1.

YH
--
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/