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:   Tue, 18 Apr 2017 09:14:56 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
        qiuxishi@...wei.com, Kani Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@....com>,
        slaoub@...il.com, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
        Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
        Tobias Regnery <tobias.regnery@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less

On Mon 17-04-17 14:51:12, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> > All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
> > attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
> > feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
> > more testing/review!
> 
> This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer
> fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests.
> Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc?

OK, I will rebase on top of linux-next. This has been based on mmotm
tree so far. Btw. is there anything that would change the current
implementation other than small context tweaks? In other words, do you
see any issues with the current implementation regarding nvdimm's
ZONE_DEVICE usage?

Thanks!

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ