linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] x86, mm: make split_mem

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:   Thu, 28 Mar 2019 01:16:08 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
cc:     Wei Yang <richardw.yang@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.or
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] x86, mm: make split_mem_range() more easy to read

Wei,

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 03:29:04PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >Note, it's a combo of changes (including your patch 1/6) and needs to be
> >split up. It would be nice if you have time to split it up into separate
> >patches, add proper changelogs and test the heck out of it on both 32 and
> >64 bit. If you don't have time, please let me know.
> >
> 
> Thanks for your suggestions :-)
> 
> Just get my head up, will try to understand the code and test on both
> arch.
> 
> BTW, do you have some suggestions in the test? Currently I just use
> bootup test. Basicly I think this is fine to cover the cases. Maybe you
> would have some better idea.

This is about bootup in the first place. After that memory hotplug which
you can emulate with qemu/kvm IIRC.

The important part about testing is to have systems which expose a wide
variety memory layouts.

Thanks,

	tglx