linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] use pinned_vm instead of locked

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:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 18:15:57 -0500
From:   Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dave@...olabs.net, jack@...e.cz,
        cl@...ux.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        alex.williamson@...hat.com, paulus@...abs.org,
        benh@...nel.crashing.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, hao.wu@...el.com,
        atull@...nel.org, mdf@...nel.org, aik@...abs.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] use pinned_vm instead of locked_vm to account pinned
 pages

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 03:54:47PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:44:32PM -0500, Daniel Jordan wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This series converts users that account pinned pages with locked_vm to
> > account with pinned_vm instead, pinned_vm being the correct counter to
> > use.  It's based on a similar patch I posted recently[0].
> > 
> > The patches are based on rdma/for-next to build on Davidlohr Bueso's
> > recent conversion of pinned_vm to an atomic64_t[1].  Seems to make some
> > sense for these to be routed the same way, despite lack of rdma content?
> 
> Oy.. I'd be willing to accumulate a branch with acks to send to Linus
> *separately* from RDMA to Linus, but this is very abnormal.
> 
> Better to wait a few weeks for -rc1 and send patches through the
> subsystem trees.

Ok, I can do that.  It did seem strange, so I made it a question...