linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] mm/memory_hotplug: split memmap_on

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <32bea77c4c632f29adfa0556661f1998591a834b.camel@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Oct 2023 18:19:22 +0000
From:   "Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>
To:     "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        "david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>
CC:     "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "osalvador@...e.de" <osalvador@...e.de>,
        "linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Hocko, Michal" <mhocko@...e.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev" <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "jmoyer@...hat.com" <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
        "Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com" <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] mm/memory_hotplug: split memmap_on_memory requests
 across memblocks

On Thu, 2023-10-12 at 10:40 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 12.10.23 07:53, Verma, Vishal L wrote:
> > On Mon, 2023-10-09 at 17:04 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > On 07.10.23 10:55, Huang, Ying wrote:
> > > > Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com> writes:
> 
<..>
> > +
> > +       for (cur_start = start; cur_start < start + size;
> > +            cur_start += memblock_size) {
> > +               if (walk_memory_blocks(cur_start, memblock_size, &mem,
> > +                                      test_has_altmap_cb))
> > +                       num_altmaps++;
> > +               else
> > +                       num_no_altmaps++;
> > +       }
> 
> You should do that without the outer loop, by doing the counting in the 
> callback function instead.      
> 
> 
I made a new callback, since the existing callback that returns the
memory_block breaks the walk the first time an altmap was encountered.

Agreed on all the other comments - it looks much cleaner now!

Sending v6 shortly with all of this.