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:   Wed, 3 Oct 2018 16:40:27 +0530
From:   Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
To:     Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     punit.agrawal@....com, will.deacon@....com, Steven.Price@....com,
        catalin.marinas@....com, mhocko@...nel.org,
        mike.kravetz@...cle.com, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/hugetlb: Enable PUD level huge page migration



On 10/03/2018 03:52 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/10/18 13:56, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/02/2018 06:08 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>> Hi Anshuman
>>>
>>> On 02/10/18 13:15, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>>> Architectures like arm64 have PUD level HugeTLB pages for certain configs
>>>> (1GB huge page is PUD based on ARM64_4K_PAGES base page size) that can be
>>>> enabled for migration. It can be achieved through checking for PUD_SHIFT
>>>> order based HugeTLB pages during migration.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    include/linux/hugetlb.h | 3 ++-
>>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/hugetlb.h b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
>>>> index 6b68e34..9c1b77f 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/hugetlb.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
>>>> @@ -483,7 +483,8 @@ static inline bool hugepage_migration_supported(struct hstate *h)
>>>>    {
>>>>    #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_HUGEPAGE_MIGRATION
>>>>        if ((huge_page_shift(h) == PMD_SHIFT) ||
>>>> -        (huge_page_shift(h) == PGDIR_SHIFT))
>>>> +        (huge_page_shift(h) == PUD_SHIFT) ||
>>>
>>>
>>>> +            (huge_page_shift(h) == PGDIR_SHIFT))
>>>
>>> nit: Extra Tab ^^.
>>
>> The tab is in there when you apply this patch and all three checks are tab separated
>> in a newline.
> 
> Well, with the patch applied, at least I can see 2 tabs for the
> PUD_SHIFT check and 3 tabs for PGDIR_SHIFT check. Which seems
> inconsistent. Is it just me (my mail client) ?

I am sorry, you are right. Did not understand your point earlier. Yeah there is
increasing number of tabs for each new line with a conditional check. Is there
a problem with this style of indentation ? Though I will be happy to change.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ