linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/35] lmb: prepare x86 to use lmb to replace 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]

Message-ID: <4BED78F5.2010501@oracle.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 May 2010 09:23:17 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/35] lmb: prepare x86 to use lmb to replace early_res

On 05/14/2010 01:09 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 23:19 -0700, Yinghai wrote:
>   
>>> If we expose LMB_ERROR then all lmb calls that can fail should
>>>       
>> return
>>     
>>> that. However, the API calls all return 0 instead. Changing that
>>>       
>> means
>>     
>>> fixing all callers.
>>>       
>> ok will stop use LMB_ERROR out lib/lmb.c
>>
>> will go back to use -1ULL for x86 path.
>>     
> No. That is not the point. Read the rest of my email !
>
> We need to -sanitize- those errors. _Maybe_ exposing LMB_ERROR is the
> right way to do so, but in that case, we need to make -all- function use
> the same error code. Right now, some fail with 0 and some with
> LMB_ERROR.
>   

will check what is effects for changing all to LMB_ERROR

> You are also not responding to my other comments such as:
>  
>   
>>> I'm also not too happy with exposing lmb_add_region(). Why would you
>>> ever need to expose it ? Just call lmb_reserve() if you want to
>>>       
>> reserve
>>     
>>> something. lmb_add_region() is an internal function and has no
>>>       
>> business
>>     
>>> being used outside of the main lmb.c file.
>>>       
in other mail. and updated version in the git dropped that
lmb_add_region exposing.

Thanks

Yinghai
--
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/