linux-kernel - Re: x86: vmalloc and THP

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]

Message-ID: <20140812214051.GA17497@node.dhcp.inet.fi>
Date:	Wed, 13 Aug 2014 00:40:51 +0300
From:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:	Oren Twaig <oren@...lemp.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	"Shai Fultheim (Shai@...leMP.com)" <Shai@...lemp.com>
Subject: Re: x86: vmalloc and THP

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 07:20:52PM +0300, Oren Twaig wrote:
> >What's the point to use vmalloc() in this case?
> I've noticed that some lock/s are using linear addresses which are
> located at 0xffffc901922b4500 and from what I understand
> from mm.txt (kernel 3.0.101):
> *ffffc90000000000 - ffffe8ffffffffff (=45 bits) vmalloc/ioremap space
> 
> *So I'm not sure who/how/why this lock got allocated there, but obviously
> it is using that linear set. No ?

It would be nice to know what lock it was, but nothing is inherently wrong
with lock in vmalloc space.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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/