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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4BACAD00020000780003726B@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Date:	Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:48:00 +0000
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com>
To:	<yinghai@...nel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: free_bootmem() == free_early() with CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM

Why is free_bootmem() not calling free_early_partial() instead? I don't
think the (legacy?) bootmem allocator had a restriction on not allowing
partial blocks to be returned, and it certainly didn't fail on fragments of
blocks previously reserved with reserve_early() being freed.

Seems like a regression to me, but I'd like to understand first if there
is any deeper reason behind the chosen solution.

Thanks, Jan

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ