linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/8] badpage: simplify page

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812021357390.28623@blonde.anvils>
Date:	Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:12:05 +0000 (GMT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Russ Anderson <rja@....com>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] badpage: simplify page_alloc flag check+clear

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> 
> > > But they are always clear on free. The checking is irrelevant.
> >
> > How about CHECK_PAGE_FLAGS_CLEAR_AT_FREE?
> 
> Strange name.

Looks like I'm not going to be able to satisfy you then.  I didn't
introduce the names in the patch, so let's leave them as is for now,
and everybody can muse on what they should get called in the end.

> > > If (page->flags & (all the flags including dirty and SwapBacked))
> > > 	zap-em.
> >
> > That's exactly what I did, isn't it?
> 
> Yes but you added another instance of this.

Did I?  Whereabouts?  I wonder if you're thinking of the
+	page->flags &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP;
in prep_new_page(), which replaces the clearing of another
collection of flags which somehow didn't get named before.

That clearing is a temporary measure, to keep the handling
of PageReserved unchanged in that patch; then it vanishes in the
next patch, where we treat all bad_page candidates the same way.

> Can you consolidate all the check and clears into one?

You mean one test_and_clear_bits() that somehow covers the different
cases of what we expect at free time and what we need at alloc time?
I don't think so.

Hugh
--
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/