linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] printk: use alloc_bootmem() instead of memblock

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:	Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:50:34 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Fabio M. Di Nitto" <fdinitto@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Olaf Hering <olaf@...fle.de>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] printk: use alloc_bootmem() instead of memblock_alloc().

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@...il.com> wrote:
>> that seems not right.
>>
>> for x86, setup_log_buf(1) is quite early called in setup_arch() before
>> bootmem is there.
>>
>> bootmem should be killed after memblock is supported for arch that
>> current support bootmem.
>
> Hmm.  x86 uses nobootmem.c, which implements bootmem in terms of
> memblock anyway.  It is definitely working at setup_log_buf() time (or
> else it wouldn't be able to select a sensible buffer location).


ok, you may could do that now.
only after recent changes from Tejun, that kill early_node_map().

before that, we only can use nobootmem after
arch/x86/kernel/setup.c::setup_arch/initmem_init()
but memblock alloc could be used just after
arch/x86/kernel/setup.c::setup_arch/memblock_x86_fill()

Now you put back bootmem calling early, will cause confusion.

>
> I suppose you're saying that it wouldn't work for a hypothetical
> architecture that *does* support bootmem and *also* supports
> setup_log_buf(1).  Will there ever be such an architecture, or will
> bootmem be retired first?

we should use adding memblock_alloc calling instead... go backward...

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/