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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 22:17:35 +0000 From: Pasha Tatashin <Pavel.Tatashin@...rosoft.com> To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...hadventures.net> CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>, Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@...el.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Jia He <jia.he@...-semitech.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>, Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.com>, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>, Ross Zwisler <zwisler@...nel.org>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/5] mm/memory_hotplug: check if sections are already online/offline On 8/16/18 7:00 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 16.08.2018 12:47, Oscar Salvador wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 12:06:26PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> >>> + >>> +/* check if all mem sections are offline */ >>> +bool mem_sections_offline(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn) >>> +{ >>> + for (; pfn < end_pfn; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) { >>> + unsigned long section_nr = pfn_to_section_nr(pfn); >>> + >>> + if (WARN_ON(!valid_section_nr(section_nr))) >>> + continue; >>> + if (online_section_nr(section_nr)) >>> + return false; >>> + } >>> + return true; >>> +} >> >> AFAICS pages_correctly_probed will catch this first. >> pages_correctly_probed checks for the section to be: >> >> - present >> - valid >> - !online > > Right, I missed that function. > >> >> Maybe it makes sense to rename it, and write another pages_correctly_probed routine >> for the offline case. >> >> So all checks would stay in memory_block_action level, and we would not need >> the mem_sections_offline/online stuff. I am OK with that, but will wait for a patch to review. Pavel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists