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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:03:38 -0400 From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, x86@...nel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net, willy@...radead.org, ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, will.deacon@....com, catalin.marinas@....com, sam@...nborg.org Subject: Re: [v6 08/15] mm: zero struct pages during initialization > I believe this deserves much more detailed explanation why this is safe. > What actually prevents any pfn walker from seeing an uninitialized > struct page? Please make your assumptions explicit in the commit log so > that we can check them independently. There is nothing prevents pfn walkers from walk over any struct pages deferred and non-deferred. However, during boot before deferred pages are initialized we have just a few places that do that, and all of those cases are fixed in this patchset. > Also this is done with some purpose which is the perfmance, right? You > have mentioned that in the cover letter but if somebody is going to read > through git logs this wouldn't be obvious from the specific commit. > So add that information here as well. Especially numbers will be > interesting. I will add more performance data to this patch comment.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists