linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v18 00/37] Use lmb with x86

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: <1276677680.2552.205.camel@pasglop>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:41:20 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v18 00/37] Use lmb with x86

On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 23:10 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 15, 2010, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> >  46 files changed, 1476 insertions(+), 1282 deletions(-)
> 
> So what was the advantage again? It's adding more lines than it
> removes. Wasn't the point to simplify things, not make them bigger?

I -think- the point is that once that's done, you can remove a whole lot
of gunk that was added such as the kernel/range.c caca, etc...
(basically, x86 gunk gratuituously made generic and that should really
just die instead).

However, I do have some issues with some aspects of Yinghai port to x86,
where instead of removing the old crap, it adds a layer that turns the
LMB into that old crap which is then turned back into something else...
not too sure, it's definitely a bit weird.

So using LMB per-se is a good idea, because it replaces whatever other
range management/allocator you have there. But it has to be done "right"
and I think we need Thomas, Ingo and/or Peter to give that a good look
and see whether what we have there is "right" or not as far as x86 is
concerned.

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/