linux-kernel - Re: [v3 PATCH 3/5] mm: hwpoison: refactor refcount check handling

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: <YV8d3ydgMcTkLwrG@t490s>
Date:   Thu, 7 Oct 2021 12:18:39 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
Cc:     HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 
        <naoya.horiguchi@....com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH 3/5] mm: hwpoison: refactor refcount check handling

On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 07:47:20PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> Yeah, it is intentional. Before this change all me_* handlers did
> check refcount even though it was not necessary, for example,
> me_kernel() and me_unknown().

Would you mind add some explanation into the commit message on what kind of
pages dropped the refcount check, and why they can be dropped, when you respin?
Thanks a lot.

-- 
Peter Xu