linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mm, oom: move task_will_free_mem up in the file to be used in process

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: <CAJuCfpGsSFccjV9Qd86PCdLHjRG9gdP7snfy-856pzmfxdGO1w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:59:44 -0700
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>,
        Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mm, oom: move task_will_free_mem up in the file to
 be used in process_mrelease

On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 1:51 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:19:35 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > > > This would not require moving other functions.
> > > > Would that be better than the current approach or the forward declaration?
> > >
> > > IMHO that could be an easy, possible alternative.
> >
> > Andrew, others? Should I follow this path instead?
>
> Whatever you prefer ;)

I understand David's concern too well to ignore it, so I prefer to
follow this middle-ground approach if you don't mind :)