linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH mm-unstable v2 00/16] mm: Introduce arch_mmap

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: <CAC_TJvcdz854DmBoVRkb_B5j+u-t=4zHkLtHVeB5RJ=bXcBJag@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 10:06:55 -0500
From: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, vbabka@...e.cz, 
	yang@...amperecomputing.com, riel@...riel.com, david@...hat.com, 
	minchan@...nel.org, jyescas@...gle.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, 
	tsbogend@...ha.franken.de, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com, 
	ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, dalias@...c.org, glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de, 
	davem@...emloft.net, andreas@...sler.com, tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, 
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, chris@...kel.net, 
	jcmvbkbc@...il.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com, jason.andryuk@....com, 
	leitao@...ian.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, 
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	kernel-team@...roid.com, android-mm@...gle.com, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm-unstable v2 00/16] mm: Introduce arch_mmap_hint()

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 4:00 AM Lorenzo Stoakes
<lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 05:36:09PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:51:34 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com> wrote:
> >
> > > You've fundamentally violated kernel process and etiquette. I'd be more
> > > forgiving, but this is at v2 and you've not cc'd KEY people. Twice. This is
> > > totally unacceptable. See [0] if you are unsure of how to do so.
> >
> > This feels excessive to me.  linux-mm averages a mere 140 mesages/day
> > and it seems reasonable to assume that key people are spending their 5
> > minutes to scroll through the email subjects.
>
> In practice we did all miss it, and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask
> people to run get_maintainers.pl to avoid this.
>
> In any case, I truly do think this series works better as RFC, I mean Liam
> has already voiced the kind of disagreements I share with it, and we need
> to rethink how to approach it in general.
>
> So if this is simply sent as RFC with the correct cc's (and ideally with
> some review feedback applied - a better cover letter, etc.) then it makes
> everything easier.
>
> As mentioned the timing is unfortunate here, this is a series we really
> want to make sure is properly reviewed before any chance of merge so again
> this points to RFC being the way forward.

Hi everyone,

Sorry for the delayed response -- I was traveling and didn’t have
access to email.

Thank you for the feedback. I realize I missed some key reviewers in
the CC list for this patch.
When I ran get_maintainer.pl, it returned a large list of recipients.
To avoid over-CC’ing people (which has been an issue for me in the
past), I tried to trim it down to maintainers and a few others I
thought would be interested. Clearly, I got it wrong and missed some
key folks. That was not my intention, and I’ll make sure to fix it
when I resend the patch as an RFC.

On the technical side, Liam is right that the copy-pasted arch code
has inconsistencies (missing checks, order of checks, ...). I agree
there’s room for further consolidation. I’ll take another stab at it
and resend it as an RFC with an updated cover letter, as Lorenzo and
others suggested.

Thanks,
Kalesh