linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [2/4] SLAB: Separate node initialization into separate function

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:	Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:44:05 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
cc:	penberg@...helsinki.fi, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, haicheng.li@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2/4] SLAB: Separate node initialization into separate
 function

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010, Andi Kleen wrote:

> Index: linux-2.6.32-memhotadd/mm/slab.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.32-memhotadd.orig/mm/slab.c
> +++ linux-2.6.32-memhotadd/mm/slab.c
> @@ -1158,19 +1158,9 @@ free_array_cache:
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static int __cpuinit cpuup_prepare(long cpu)
> +static int slab_node_prepare(int node)

I still think this deserves a comment saying that slab_node_prepare() 
requires cache_chain_mutex, I'm not sure people interested in node hotadd 
would be concerned with whether the implementation needs to iterate slab 
caches or not.

Otherwise:

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
--
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/