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]
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2017 10:31:13 +0000
From:   Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@....com>
To:     Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
Cc:     Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Riley Andrews <riandrews@...roid.com>,
        Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        Rom Lemarchand <romlem@...gle.com>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        "linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/12] Ion cleanup in preparation for moving out of
 staging

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 09:38:49AM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
>On 03/09/2017 02:00 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:

[snip]

>>
>> For me those patches are going in the right direction.
>>
>> I still have few questions:
>> - since alignment management has been remove from ion-core, should it
>> be also removed from ioctl structure ?
>
>Yes, I think I'm going to go with the suggestion to fixup the ABI
>so we don't need the compat layer and as part of that I'm also
>dropping the align argument.
>

Is the only motivation for removing the alignment parameter that
no-one got around to using it for something useful yet?
The original comment was true - different devices do have different
alignment requirements.

Better alignment can help SMMUs use larger blocks when mapping,
reducing TLB pressure and the chance of a page table walk causing
display underruns.

-Brian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ