linux-kernel - Re: add_to_swap_cache with GFP

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.4.64.0904011245130.12751@blonde.anvils>
Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2009 12:46:13 +0100 (BST)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: add_to_swap_cache with GFP_ATOMIC ?

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> 
> IOW, GFP_ATOMIC on add_to_swap() was introduced accidentally. the reason 
> was old add_to_page_cache() didn't have gfp_mask parameter and we didn't
>  have the reason of changing add_to_swap() behavior.
> I think it don't have deeply reason and changing GFP_NOIO
> don't cause regression.

You may well be right: we'll see if you send in a patch to change it.
But I won't be sending in that patch myself, that's all :)

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/