linux-kernel - zsmalloc zbud hybrid design discussion?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ef105888-1996-4c78-829a-36b84973ce65@default>
Date:	Wed, 27 Mar 2013 13:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
To:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>,
	Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Wanpeng Li <liwanp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: zsmalloc zbud hybrid design discussion?

Seth and all zproject folks --

I've been giving some deep thought as to how a zpage
allocator might be designed that would incorporate the
best of both zsmalloc and zbud.

Rather than dive into coding, it occurs to me that the
best chance of success would be if all interested parties
could first discuss (on-list) and converge on a design
that we can all agree on.  If we achieve that, I don't
care who writes the code and/or gets the credit or
chooses the name.  If we can't achieve consensus, at
least it will be much clearer where our differences lie.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Dan
--
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/