linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 00/24] Speculative page faults

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: <5e0d0fdd-4c7d-5895-4a0d-4c71e9c142b5@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 14:33:48 +0100
From:   Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kirill@...temov.name,
        ak@...ux.intel.com, dave@...olabs.net, jack@...e.cz,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
        mpe@...erman.id.au, paulus@...ba.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, hpa@...or.com,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        kemi.wang@...el.com, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        haren@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        npiggin@...il.com, bsingharora@...il.com,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/24] Speculative page faults

On 14/03/2018 14:11, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 13-03-18 18:59:30, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> Changes since v8:
>>  - Don't check PMD when locking the pte when THP is disabled
>>    Thanks to Daniel Jordan for reporting this.
>>  - Rebase on 4.16
> 
> Is this really worth reposting the whole pile? I mean this is at v9,
> each doing little changes. It is quite tiresome to barely get to a
> bookmarked version just to find out that there are 2 new versions out.

I agree, I could have sent only a change for the concerned patch. But the
previous series has been sent a month ago and this one is rebased on the 4.16
kernel.

> I am sorry to be grumpy and I can understand some frustration it doesn't
> move forward that easilly but this is a _big_ change. We should start
> with a real high level review rather than doing small changes here and
> there and reach v20 quickly.
> 
> I am planning to find some time to look at it but the spare cycles are
> so rare these days...

I understand that this is a big change and I'll try to not post a new series
until I get more feedback from this one.

Thanks,
Laurent.