linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1

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: <0dbf7e99-7db4-4d8b-ecca-60893c83a2a9@nvidia.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:17:58 -0800
From:   John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To:     <jglisse@...hat.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1

On 1/29/19 8:54 AM, jglisse@...hat.com wrote:
> From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
> 
> This patchset improves the HMM driver API and add support for hugetlbfs
> and DAX mirroring. The improvement motivation was to make the ODP to HMM
> conversion easier [1]. Because we have nouveau bits schedule for 5.1 and
> to avoid any multi-tree synchronization this patchset adds few lines of
> inline function that wrap the existing HMM driver API to the improved
> API. The nouveau driver was tested before and after this patchset and it
> builds and works on both case so there is no merging issue [2]. The
> nouveau bit are queue up for 5.1 so this is why i added those inline.
> 
> If this get merge in 5.1 the plans is to merge the HMM to ODP in 5.2 or
> 5.3 if testing shows any issues (so far no issues has been found with
> limited testing but Mellanox will be running heavier testing for longer
> time).
> 
> To avoid spamming mm i would like to not cc mm on ODP or nouveau patches,
> however if people prefer to see those on mm mailing list then i can keep
> it cced.
> 
> This is also what i intend to use as a base for AMD and Intel patches
> (v2 with more thing of some rfc which were already posted in the past).
> 

Hi Jerome,

Although Ralph has been testing and looking at this patchset, I just now
noticed that there hasn't been much public review of it, so I'm doing
a bit of that now. I don't think it's *quite* too late, because we're
still not at the 5.1 merge window...sorry for taking so long to get to
this.

Ralph, you might want to add ACKs or Tested-by's to some of these
patches (or even Reviewed-by, if you went that deep, which I suspect you
did in some cases), according to what you feel comfortable with?


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA