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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZfrhGANU2gxE5+9c@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:14:00 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
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 03/20/24 at 11:36am, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> 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.

OK, firslty remove the only user, that sounds reasonable. Will change.
Thanks.