linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFCv3 0/6] The Contiguous Memory Allocator framework

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: <20100820193328P.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date:	Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:35:01 +0900
From:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To:	m.nazarewicz@...sung.com
Cc:	fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, hverkuil@...all.nl,
	dwalker@...eaurora.org, linux@....linux.org.uk, corbet@....net,
	p.osciak@...sung.com, broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hvaibhav@...com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	kyungmin.park@...sung.com, kgene.kim@...sung.com,
	zpfeffer@...eaurora.org, jaeryul.oh@...sung.com,
	m.szyprowski@...sung.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFCv3 0/6] The Contiguous Memory Allocator framework

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:10:45 +0200
**UNKNOWN CHARSET** <m.nazarewicz@...sung.com> wrote:

> > I wrote "similar to the existing API', not "reuse the existing API".
> 
> Yes, but I don't really know what you have in mind.  CMA is similar to various
> APIs in various ways: it's similar to any allocator since it takes
> size in bytes,

why don't take gfp_t flags?

Something like dev_alloc_page is more appropriate name?

Or something similar to dmapool API (mm/dmapool.c) might work
better. The purpose of dmapool API is creating a pool for consistent
memory per device. It's similar to yours, creating a pool for
contiguous memory per device(s)?


> it's similar to coherent since it takes device, it's similar to bootmem/memblock/etc
> since it takes alignment.

I don't think that bootmem/memblock matters here since it's not the
API for drivers.


> > 4k to 40k? I'm not sure. But If I see something like the following, I
> > suspect that there is a better way to integrate this into the existing
> > infrastructure.
> >
> > mm/cma-best-fit.c                   |  407 +++++++++++++++
> 
> Ah, sorry.  I misunderstood you.  I thought you were replying to both 2. and 3.
> above.
> 
> If we only take allocating algorithm then you're right.  Reusing existing one
> should not increase the patch size plus it would be probably a better solution.
> 
> No matter, I would rather first work and core CMA without worrying about reusing
> kmalloc()/coherent/etc. code especially since providing a plugable allocator API
> integration with existing allocating algorithms can be made later on.  To put it
> short I want first to make it work and then improve it.

I'm not sure that's how a new feature is merged.
--
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/