linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/20] early_res: seperate common memmap func from e820.c to fw

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100323094834.GB4576@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:48:34 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	benh@...nel.crashing.org, hpa@...or.com, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20] early_res: seperate common memmap func from e820.c
 to fw_memmap.cy

* Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:

> > 2)
> > 
> > I think we also need to concentrate the changes back into LMB:
> 
> yes. put them in kernel/early_res.c and move them to lmb.c if lmb gugs are 
> happy with the change.

Yes, they seemed OK with changing it to accomodate x86, as long as current 
behavior stays compatible and as long as the changes are squeaky-clean.

Both of which are highly reasonable expectations ;-)

> > early_res.h will go away as well and all the new APIs will be in lmb.h.
> 
> current have three levels
> a. old lmb users
> b. x86 with bootmem
> c. x86 with no-bootmem
> 
> some functions later could be moved to new bootmem.c

I think we want to work towards the end result where we dont have bootmem.c 
anymore. I.e. a modern LMB architecture should generally not make use of 
bootmem at all.

We could do that switch on x86 straight away, and make CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM a 
default-y option, hm? We could also hide the interactivity behind 
CONFIG_DEBUG_VM or so - and eliminate it altogether later on.

We should also switch around the flag and turn it into CONFIG_BOOTMEM.

Hm?

	Ingo
--
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/