linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm/vmap: Add a notifier for when we run out of vmap address space

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: <20160328161549.c77046847a8ae791cb436aff@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:15:49 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Cc:	intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Roman Peniaev <r.peniaev@...il.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/vmap: Add a notifier for when we run out of vmap
 address space

On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:41:56 +0000 Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 01:34:59PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > vmaps are temporary kernel mappings that may be of long duration.
> > Reusing a vmap on an object is preferrable for a driver as the cost of
> > setting up the vmap can otherwise dominate the operation on the object.
> > However, the vmap address space is rather limited on 32bit systems and
> > so we add a notification for vmap pressure in order for the driver to
> > release any cached vmappings.
> > 
> > The interface is styled after the oom-notifier where the callees are
> > passed a pointer to an unsigned long counter for them to indicate if they
> > have freed any space.
> > 
> > v2: Guard the blocking notifier call with gfpflags_allow_blocking()
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Roman Peniaev <r.peniaev@...il.com>
> > Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> > Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > ---
> >  include/linux/vmalloc.h |  4 ++++
> >  mm/vmalloc.c            | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 31 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/vmalloc.h b/include/linux/vmalloc.h
> > index d1f1d338af20..edd676b8e112 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/vmalloc.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/vmalloc.h
> > @@ -187,4 +187,8 @@ pcpu_free_vm_areas(struct vm_struct **vms, int nr_vms)
> >  #define VMALLOC_TOTAL 0UL
> >  #endif
> >  
> > +struct notitifer_block;
> Omg. /o\

Hah.

Please move the forward declaration to top-of-file.  This prevents
people from later adding the same thing at line 100 - this has happened
before.

Apart from that, all looks OK to me - please merge it via the DRM tree
if that is more convenient.