linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/2] docs: ftrace: Clarify the RAM impact of buffer_size

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191115110320.55b3d9cb@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 11:03:20 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Frank A. Cancio Bello" <frank@...eralsoftwareinc.com>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] docs: ftrace: Clarify the RAM impact of
 buffer_size_kb

On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 10:59:55 -0500
"Frank A. Cancio Bello" <frank@...eralsoftwareinc.com> wrote:

> I feel that adding:
> 
> "A few extra pages may be allocated to accommodate buffer management
> meta-data."
> 
> between the two sentences that I quoted will address the issue. If
> that is OK with you I will proceed to package this change in a new
> patchset along with a few fixes of typos that I spotted in other
> parts of the doc.

Yep, I'm OK with that.

Thanks!

-- Steve