linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dmapool: push new blocks in ascending order

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: <Y/zmUXrAiNujjoib@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:20:17 -0700
From:   Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Keith Busch <kbusch@...a.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmapool: push new blocks in ascending order

On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 08:42:39PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 08:54:00 -0800 Keith Busch <kbusch@...a.com> wrote:
> 
> > Some users of the dmapool need their allocations to happen in ascending
> > order. The recent optimizations pushed the blocks in reverse order, so
> > restore the previous behavior by linking the next available block from
> > low-to-high.
> 
> As I understand it, this fixes the only known issues with patch series
> "dmapool enhancements", v4.  So we're good for a merge before 6.3-rc1,
> yes?

I was going to say "yes", but Guenter is reporting a new error with the
original series. I working on that right now.