linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 44/60] PCI: Add alt_size ressource allocation support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:24:29 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Wei Yang <weiyang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, TJ <linux@....tj>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
	Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 44/60] PCI: Add alt_size ressource allocation support

On Thu, 2016-04-07 at 17:56 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Maybe the kernel should just accept the smaller alignment. If the
> minimum alignment we use is bigger than necessary, then we're just
> wrong about it, and perhaps we should just use the smaller alignment
> that the bios used.
> 
> So instead of adding this notion of alternate alignment, maybe we
> should just not be so uptight about our own minimum alignment
> requirements?

On the other hand it's nice to align things at page boundaries when
these resources can possibly be mapped by user space or KVM guests...

Cheers,
Ben.