[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YtBdSYbCyGJeIHHO@pc636>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:15:56 +0200
From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-modules@...r.kernel.org" <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>,
"mcgrof@...nel.org" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"mhiramat@...nel.org" <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
"naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com" <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"dave@...olabs.net" <dave@...olabs.net>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] mm/vmalloc: introduce vmalloc_exec which
allocates RO+X memory
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 04:54:40AM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>
>
> > On Jul 13, 2022, at 9:23 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 03:49:45PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jul 13, 2022, at 3:08 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> NAK. This is not something that should be an exported public API
> >>> ever.
> >>
> >> Hmm.. I will remove EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (if we ever do a v2 of this..)
> >
> > Even without that it really is not a vmalloc API anyway.
>
> This ...
>
> > Executable
> > memory needs to be written first, so we should allocate it in that state
> > and only mark it executable after that write has completed.
>
> ... and this are two separate NAKs.
>
> For the first NAK, I agree that my version is another layer on top of
> vmalloc. But what do you think about Peter's idea? AFAICT, that fits
> well in vmalloc logic.
>
I am not able to find the patch/change to see what you have done. But
please do not build a new allocator on top of vmalloc code. We have
three different ones what make things to be complicated :)
--
Uladzislau Rezki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists