linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/16] tools: Move gfp.h and slab.h from radix-tree to lib

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]

Date:   Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:28:47 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Karolina Drobnik <karolinadrobnik@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mike.rapoport@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] tools: Move gfp.h and slab.h from radix-tree to lib

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 02:21:19PM +0100, Karolina Drobnik wrote:
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
> +#define __GFP_ZERO		0x8000u
> +#define __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM	0x400000u
> +
> +#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT 26
> +#define __GFP_BITS_MASK ((gfp_t)((1 << __GFP_BITS_SHIFT) - 1))
> +
> +#define __GFP_HIGH		0x20u
> +#define __GFP_IO		0x40u
> +#define __GFP_FS		0x80u
> +#define __GFP_NOWARN		0x200u
> +#define __GFP_ATOMIC		0x80000u
> +#define __GFP_ACCOUNT		0x100000u
> +#define __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM	0x2000000u

Why have you reordered the bits here?

> -#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT 26
> -#define __GFP_BITS_MASK ((gfp_t)((1 << __GFP_BITS_SHIFT) - 1))
> -
> -#define __GFP_HIGH		0x20u
> -#define __GFP_IO		0x40u
> -#define __GFP_FS		0x80u
> -#define __GFP_NOWARN		0x200u
> -#define __GFP_ZERO		0x8000u
> -#define __GFP_ATOMIC		0x80000u
> -#define __GFP_ACCOUNT		0x100000u
> -#define __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM	0x400000u
> -#define __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM	0x2000000u

The original ordering makes more sense to me (but then it would; I did
it)