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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 25 Jun 2014 14:33:56 +0200
From:	Marek Szyprowski <>
To:	Andrew Morton <>,
	Joonsoo Kim <>
Cc:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <>,
	Minchan Kim <>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	Paolo Bonzini <>,
	Gleb Natapov <>, Alexander Graf <>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>,
	Paul Mackerras <>,,,,,,,
	Zhang Yanfei <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -next 0/9] CMA: generalize CMA reserved area management


On 2014-06-18 22:51, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 10:25:07 +0900 Joonsoo Kim <> wrote:
>>>> v2:
>>>>    - Although this patchset looks very different with v1, the end result,
>>>>    that is, mm/cma.c is same with v1's one. So I carry Ack to patch 6-7.
>>>> This patchset is based on linux-next 20140610.
>>> Thanks for taking care of this. I will test it with my setup and if
>>> everything goes well, I will take it to my -next tree. If any branch
>>> is required for anyone to continue his works on top of those patches,
>>> let me know, I will also prepare it.
>> Hello,
>> I'm glad to hear that. :)
>> But, there is one concern. As you already know, I am preparing further
>> patches (Aggressively allocate the pages on CMA reserved memory). It
>> may be highly related to MM branch and also slightly depends on this CMA
>> changes. In this case, what is the best strategy to merge this
>> patchset? IMHO, Anrew's tree is more appropriate branch. If there is
>> no issue in this case, I am willing to develope further patches based
>> on your tree.
> That's probably easier.  Marek, I'll merge these into -mm (and hence
> -next and git://
> and shall hold them pending you review/ack/test/etc, OK?

Ok. I've tested them and they work fine. I'm sorry that you had to wait for
me for a few days. You can now add:

Acked-and-tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <>

I've also rebased my pending patches onto this set (I will send them soon).

The question is now if you want to keep the discussed patches in your 
-mm tree,
or should I take them to my -next branch. If you like to keep them, I assume
you will also take the patches which depends on the discussed changes.

Best regards
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists