linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86: remove memblock_find_dma

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: <ZfquM06LOZB4vddu@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:36:51 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86: remove memblock_find_dma_reserve()

On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 03:52:52PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 03/19/24 at 05:49pm, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > Hi Baoquan,
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 10:21:34PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > This is not needed any more.
> > 
> > I'd swap this and the first patch, so that the first patch would remove
> > memblock_find_dma_reserve() and it's changelog will explain why it's not
> > needed and then the second patch will simply drop unused set_dma_reserve()
> 
> Thanks, Mike.
> 
> My thought on the patch 1/2 splitting is:
> patch 1 is removing all relevant codes in mm, including the usage of
> dma_reserve in free_area_init_core() and exporting set_dma_reserve()
> to any ARCH which want to subtract the dma_reserve from DMA zone.
>
> Patch 2 purely remove the code in x86 ARCH about how to get dma_reserve.
 
I think it's better first to remove the usage of set_dma_reserve() in x86
and then clean up the unused code.

> Your suggestion is also good to me, I can rearrange the order and
> repost.

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.