linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] XArray for 4.20

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: <20181028191345.GA28520@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date:   Sun, 28 Oct 2018 12:13:45 -0700
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] XArray for 4.20

On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 11:50:19AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 1:08 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> <
> > Please consider pulling the XArray patch set.
> 
> Pulled.

Thanks!

> I took the more recent version of yours, because by the time I
> actually had time to review this thing for pulling, even the recent
> version had been in linux-next for a week.
> 
> Of course, I don't think linux-next has been updated, so it's all
> moot, but the point is that I didn't get the feeling that it was all
> some very recent code.
> 
> I do like how the conversions look, with the code in some cases
> notably simpler. And it looks like at least one of the conflicts
> (fs/dax.c) was due to a bug-fix to the old code where your simpler
> xarray replacement didn't have the problem.

Yes, that's right.  It turned out to be a problem for any multiorder
radix tree user, and that was a consequence of how the radix tree API
worked for multiorder entries.  The XArray API just works better for
multiorder entries.

> NOTE! I did get some conflicts with other stuff, and while the
> conflict resolution all looked pretty straightforward, this does want
> looking at.
> 
> Particularly the mm/workingset.c code.

I've been rebasing the xarray-conv branch on your tree pretty regularly
this week, so I have a fairly good idea how I think it should look.
I'll check to see if you & I have the same thoughts when you push it out.

> It's still undergoing my build tests to verify my merge, but that
> should be completed soon. I'll do a basic boot test too due to the
> core nature of these changes, but assuming it all passes I'll push
> this out within the next 30 minutes and would appreciate people giving
> it a second look for verification.

Thank you.