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  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:   Wed, 14 Aug 2019 09:38:54 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <>
To:     Dan Williams <>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <>, Jason Gunthorpe <>,
        Jérôme Glisse <>,
        Ben Skeggs <>,
        Felix Kuehling <>,
        Ralph Campbell <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] mm: remove the pgmap field from struct

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 06:36:33PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Section alignment constraints somewhat save us here. The only example
> I can think of a PMD not containing a uniform pgmap association for
> each pte is the case when the pgmap overlaps normal dram, i.e. shares
> the same 'struct memory_section' for a given span. Otherwise, distinct
> pgmaps arrange to manage their own exclusive sections (and now
> subsections as of v5.3). Otherwise the implementation could not
> guarantee different mapping lifetimes.
> That said, this seems to want a better mechanism to determine "pfn is

So I guess this patch is fine for now, and once you provide a better
mechanism we can switch over to it?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists