linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] mmzone: note that node_size_lock should be manipulated via pgdat_resize

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:	Wed, 01 May 2013 15:36:48 -0700
From:	Cody P Schafer <cody@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mmzone: note that node_size_lock should be manipulated
 via pgdat_resize_lock()

On 05/01/2013 03:29 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013, Cody P Schafer wrote:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Cody P Schafer <cody@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Nack, pgdat_resize_unlock() is unnecessary if irqs are known to be
> disabled.
>

All this patch does is is indicate that rather than using node_size_lock 
directly (as it won't be around without CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG), one 
should use the pgdat_resize_[un]lock() helper macros.

And yes, _strictly_ speaking, one could want to avoid the 
spin_lock_irqsave/restore that pgdat_resize_*lock() does.

Right now we don't provide helpers that do that. Do you see a need for them?

--
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/