linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce init_memory

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:	Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:02:37 -0700
From:	"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce init_memory_mapping for 32bit

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>>
>> * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>> so could use mem below max_low_pfn as early. could move several
>>> function more early instead of waiting after paging_init including
>>> moving relocate_initrd early, and kva related early done in
>>> initmem_init
>>
>> applied to tip/x86/setup-memory - thanks Yinghai.
>>
>> a sidenote:
>>
>>>  6 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-)
>>
>> this patch is too large - if it causes any problems it will not be very
>> easy to figure out which exact change caused the problems.
>>
>> Lets hope it goes all fine - but in the future lets try doing
>> more+smaller patches, especially if they change some known-dangerous
>> area of the kernel.
>>
>> For example here a better splitup would have been to do 5 or more
>> patches:
>>
>>  1) first introduce init_memory_mapping() [but dont use it anywhere]
>>  2) add the init_memory_mapping() call to setup_arch()
>>  3) move remap_numa_kva()
>>  4) move relocate_initrd()
>>  5) remove the now unnecessary setup from paging_init()
>>
>> ... or something like that. The point is to manage risk: if there's
>> multiple problem areas that a change is touching, try to isolate them
>> from each other and introduce the change gradually.
>>
>> The end result is still exactly the same, but much more
>> reviewable/debuggable/bisectable.
>
> split into 3 patches, please use them to replace the old one if you like.
>
and
[PATCH] x86: fix e820_update_range size when overlapping
[PATCH] x86: get max_pfn_mapped in init_memory_mapping
[PATCH] x86: add table_top check for alloc_low_page in 64 bit
[PATCH] x86: change size if e820_update/remove_range

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/