linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Remove XA

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: <pgt2ibp5p6ctchyytnftxrgdi4vfngirkwwnu2oiqnz7b3ir25@jenws5mtfe7o>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 10:54:08 -0400
From: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
To: Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@...cinc.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
        maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@...e.de>,
        shikemeng@...weicloud.com, kasong@...cent.com, nphamcs@...il.com,
        bhe@...hat.com, baohua@...nel.org, chrisl@...nel.org,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Remove XA_ZERO from error recovery of

* Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@...cinc.com> [250818 10:27]:
> 
> On 8/18/2025 3:14 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> Before you read on, please take a moment to acknowledge that David
> >> Hildenbrand asked for this, so I'm blaming mostly him 🙂
> > 
> 
> Just curious If we can go by the suggestion of mm unstable check just
> for the 6.12, as it is LTS.  I can't see this issue on branches earlier
> to it. As well this patchset is not getting applied cleanly on 6.12.

This was developed against mm-new to be applied and potentially
backported, but it's an RFC right now so it won't be applied anywhere.

I think you still should be checking the MMF_UNSTABLE in the swap path,
as David suggested as a hotfix [1].  Considering it's a single mm global
check before iterating, it should be checked regardless of what happens
with this RFC.

Thanks,
Liam

[1].  https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/9178bf98-2ea7-4ad8-ad43-cdcc02ab863d@redhat.com/