linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Fast kernel headers: split linux/mm.h

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: <58fbe42a-3051-46bf-a3f9-d59da28a9cd7@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 17:10:30 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: willy@...radead.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Fast kernel headers: split linux/mm.h

On 12.03.24 10:41, Max Kellermann wrote:
> This patch set aims to clean up the linux/mm.h header and reduce
> dependencies on it by moving parts out.
> 
> The goal was to eliminate dependencies on linux/mm.h from other
> popular headers such as highmem.h and dma-mapping.h, and I started by
> checking which symbols were really used and moved those declarations
> to separate slim headers.
> 

[...]

>   include/linux/mm.h                            | 583 +-----------------
>   include/linux/mm/devmap_managed.h             |  37 ++
>   include/linux/mm/folio_next.h                 |  27 +

Isn't that a bit excessive? Do we really need that many folio headers?

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb