linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 3/5] usb: host: ohci-sm501: init genalloc for local memory

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190625060000.GA28986@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 25 Jun 2019 08:00:00 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Fredrik Noring <noring@...rew.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        laurentiu.tudor@....com, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        marex@...x.de, leoyang.li@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        robin.murphy@....com, JuergenUrban@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/5] usb: host: ohci-sm501: init genalloc for local
 memory

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 02:59:16PM +0200, Fredrik Noring wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
> 
> > Can you send me the patch formally so that I can queue it up for the
> > dma-mapping tree?
> 
> That patch would be detrimental to local memory devices, as previously
> discussed, so I would like to suggest a much better approach, as shown below,
> where allocations are aligned as required but not necessarily much more than
> that.

This looks sensible to me.  Can you submit it with a proper patch
description and split into a separate patch for genalloc vs the user of
the new interface?