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: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:25:14 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> Cc: Nikunj Kela <nkela@...co.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, xe-kernel@...ernal.cisco.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: add ARM64-specific support for flatmem On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 02:55:41PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 7:47 PM, Nikunj Kela <nkela@...co.com> wrote: >> > Flatmem is useful in reducing kernel memory usage. >> > One usecase is in kdump kernel. We are able to save >> > ~14M by moving to flatmem scheme. >> > >> > Cc: xe-kernel@...ernal.cisco.com >> > Cc: Nikunj Kela <nkela@...co.com> >> > Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela <nkela@...co.com> >> > --- >> > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 3 +++ >> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >> > index 42c090c..f5b4c49 100644 >> > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig >> > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >> > @@ -775,6 +775,9 @@ config ARCH_SPARSEMEM_DEFAULT >> > config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL >> > def_bool ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE >> > >> > +config ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE >> > + def_bool y >> > + >> > config HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID >> > def_bool ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL || !SPARSEMEM >> > >> >> I'm getting hundreds of errors in randconfig builds with this: > > Damn, I was worried something like this might happen. Sorry! > > Does randconfig also fuzz CONFIG_EXPERT? We only added ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE > so that people can hand-configure crashkernels to make them small; there will > be plenty of situations where it's just going to cause more problems than it > solves, so I'd be happy hiding it behind EXPERT if it helps. Yes, randconfig also tests EXPERT and COMPILE_TEST configurations, though I don't test the !COMPILE_TEST ones myself, so you can also hide options from me by making them 'depends on !COMPILE_TEST'. > Otherwise we can probably through a 'def_bool !NUMA' at it. Yes, I was going to send a patch with that next after testing it some more. So far it's holding up. This is also what some other architectures have, so it's probably safe. Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists