linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/11] x86, memblock: Allocate memory near kernel image before SRAT parsed.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:01:20 +0800
From:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC:	rjw@...k.pl, lenb@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
	hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, trenn@...e.de,
	yinghai@...nel.org, jiang.liu@...wei.com, wency@...fujitsu.com,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com,
	izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com, mgorman@...e.de, minchan@...nel.org,
	mina86@...a86.com, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com, lwoodman@...hat.com,
	riel@...hat.com, jweiner@...hat.com, prarit@...hat.com,
	zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] x86, memblock: Allocate memory near kernel image
 before SRAT parsed.

Hi tj,

On 09/05/2013 03:22 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
......
> I'm expectedly happier with this approach but some overall review
> points.
>
> * I think patch splitting went a bit too far.  e.g. it doesn't make
>    much sense or helps anything to split "introduction of a param" from
>    "the param doing something".
>
> * I think it's a lot more complex than necessary.  Just implement a
>    single function - memblock_alloc_bottom_up(@start) where specifying
>    MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE restores top down behavior and do
>    memblock_alloc_bottom_up(end_of_kernel) early during boot.  If the
>    bottom up mode is set, just try allocating bottom up from the
>    specified address and if that fails do normal top down allocation.
>    No need to meddle with the callers.  The only change necessary
>    (well, aside from the reordering) outside memblock is adding two
>    calls to the above function.
>
> * I don't think "order" is the right word here.  "direction" probably
>    fits a lot better.
>

Thanks for the advices. I'll try to simply the code and send a new 
patch-set soon.

Thanks.



--
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/