linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] generic-smp: remove kmalloc usage

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: <1234859071.4744.10.camel@laptop>
Date:	Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:24:31 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] generic-smp: remove kmalloc usage

On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 16:40 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > Now that there is no strict need for kmalloc anymore, and nobody seems to
> > rely it for the queueing behaviour, remove it.
> 
> Peter, I really hate this series.
> 
> Why?
> 
> In 1/4 you introduce that cfd RCU thing, and then in 2/4 you remove it 
> again.

Ah, no, I don't actually. I remove the kmalloc+call_rcu stuff in 2, not
the newly cfd mini rcu thing.

> I realize that you seem to do that in order to do some incremental 
> step-wise changes, but quite frankly, it just complicates the whole series 
> and makes the patches much harder to read and follow.
> 
> Why don't you just combine patches 1&2? That split-up seems to just 
> confuse things. At least it confuses me. Why does it happen?

The idea was to remove the necessity for kmalloc() in patch 1, and then
remove kmalloc() in patch 2.

If you prefer I can fold them, no problem.

But as you might have seen, Oleg has been punching holes in my #1, so I
guess I'm back to the drawing board no matter what :-)

--
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/