linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] mm/hugetlb: Fix commandline parsing behavior for invalid hugepagesize

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]

Message-ID: <20160323133011.GG7059@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 23 Mar 2016 14:30:11 +0100
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:	Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@...cle.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
	mike.kravetz@...cle.com, hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com,
	baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com, dingel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, catalin.marinas@....com,
	will.deacon@....com, cmetcalf@...hip.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, james.hogan@...tec.com,
	linux-metag@...r.kernel.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] mm/hugetlb: Fix commandline parsing behavior for
 invalid hugepagesize

On Wed 23-03-16 17:37:18, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> Current code fails to ignore the 'hugepages=' parameters when unsupported
> hugepagesize is specified. With this patchset, introduce new architecture
> independent routine hugetlb_bad_size to handle such command line options.
> And then call it in architecture specific code.
> 
> Changes since v1:
> 	- Separated different architecture specific changes in different
> 	  patches
> 	- CC'ed all arch maintainers

The hugetlb parameters parsing is a bit mess but this at least makes it
behave more consistently. Feel free to add to all patches
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>

On a side note. I have received patches with broken threading - the
follow up patches are not in the single thread under this cover email.
I thought this was the default behavior of git send-email but maybe your
(older) version doesn't do that. --thread option would enforce that
(with --no-chain-reply-to) or you can set it up in the git config. IMHO
it is always better to have the patchset in the single email thread.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs