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]

Date:	Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:47:20 -0800
From:	"Yinghai Lu" <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
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

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * 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.

i mean irq_desc will not be allocated one one on new cpus...

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/