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:	Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:09:32 -0800
From:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Matt Tolentino <matthew.e.tolentino@...el.com>,
	linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org, Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, pavel@...e.cz,
	Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] hibernation should work ok with memory
	hotplug

On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 15:02 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 14:34 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > A node might have a node_start_pfn=0 and a node_end_pfn=100 (and it may
> > have only one zone).  But, there may be another node with
> > node_start_pfn=10 and a node_end_pfn=20.  This loop:
> > 
> >         for_each_zone(zone) {
> >               ...
> >                 for (pfn = zone->zone_start_pfn; pfn < max_zone_pfn; pfn++)
> >                         if (page_is_saveable(zone, pfn))
> >                                 memory_bm_set_bit(orig_bm, pfn);
> >         }
> > 
> > will walk over the smaller node's pfn range multiple times.  Is this OK?
> > 
> > I think all you have to do to fix it is check page_zone(page) == zone
> > and skip out if they don't match.
> 
> So pfn 10 in the first node refers to the same memory as pfn 10 in the
> second node?

Sure.  But, remember that the pfns (and the entire physical address
space) is consistent across the entire system.  It's not like both nodes
have an address and the kernel only "gives" it to one of them.

There's real confusion about zone->zone_start/end_pfn, I think.  *All*
that they mean is this:

- zone_start_pfn is the lowest physical address present in the zone. 
- zone_end_pfn is the highest physical address present in the zone

That's *it*.  Those numbers imply *nothing* about the pages between
them, except that there might be 0 or more pages in there belonging to
the same zone.

"All pages in this zone lie between these two physical addresses." is
all they say.

-- Dave

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ