linux-kernel - Re: start_kernel(): bug: interrupts were enabled early

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:	Fri, 02 Apr 2010 10:00:21 +1100
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: start_kernel(): bug: interrupts were enabled early

On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 12:06 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Can we provide a kmem_cache_create_early()?  One that takes no locks and gets
> cleaned up with the other __init stuff?

Yuck. I hate having to expose more APIs. Also the problem with that is
means callers have to know. So we need to propagate up all call chains
etc... (ie, radix_tree_init_early(), etc...)

This is pretty much exactly the discussion we had when moving sl*b
early, and back then, the final word from Linus (heh, for once he agreed
with me :-) was that this made no sense.

We can bury logic inside kmem_cache_create() though, it's not -that- a
hot path.

Cheers,
Ben.

--
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/