linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn

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: <20081110100959.GA22927@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:09:59 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq


* Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:40:33 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>>> @@ -987,6 +988,8 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>       set_highmem_pages_init();
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +     after_bootmem = 1;
> >>>>>> this hack can go away once we have a proper percpu_alloc() that can be
> >>>>>> used early enough.
> >>>>> where is that fancy patch? current percpu_alloc(), will keep big 
> >>>>> pointer in array..., instead of put that pointer in percpu_area
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 64bit has that after_bootmem already.
> >>>> or at least introduce a "bootmem agnostic" allocator instead of 
> >>>> open-coding the after_bootmem flag.
> >>>>
> >>>> Something like:
> >>>>
> >>>>   early_kzalloc()
> >>>>
> >>>> ?
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrew, any preferences?
> >>> My mind reading ain't what it was, and this after_bootmem flag is
> >>> write-only in this patch.
> >>>
> >>> So what's all this about?
> >> if i use alloc_bootmem to get some memory, and later after_bootmem, 
> >> can I use kfree to free it?
> > 
> > hm, no. If we used alloc_bootmem(), then we must not free it after 
> > after_bootmem has been set.
> 
> ok, let keep irq_desc for legacy irqs not movable...

most of them are movable right now, correct? If we restrict their 
movability now that might surprise existing usecases negatively.

	Ingo
--
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/