linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Support dynamic (de)configuration of memory

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: <20251012165310.56572A3d-hca@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 18:53:10 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@...ux.ibm.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Support dynamic (de)configuration of memory

On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 11:44:26AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 10:51:43 +0200 Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Patchset provides a new interface for dynamic configuration and
> > deconfiguration of hotplug memory on s390, allowing with/without
> > memmap_on_memory support. It is a follow up on the discussion with David
> > when introducing memmap_on_memory support for s390 and support dynamic
> > (de)configuration of memory:
> > 
> > ...
> >
> >  arch/s390/mm/pgalloc.c         |   2 +
> >  arch/s390/mm/vmem.c            |  21 +--
> >  drivers/base/memory.c          |  23 +--
> >  drivers/s390/char/sclp_mem.c   | 288 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> >  include/linux/memory.h         |   9 --
> >  include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |  18 +--
> >  include/linux/memremap.h       |   1 -
> >  mm/memory_hotplug.c            |  17 +-
> >  mm/sparse.c                    |   3 +-
> >  9 files changed, 225 insertions(+), 157 deletions(-)
> 
> I can add this to mm.git in the usual fashion, but the s390 tree would
> be a better place from a testing point of view?

It is not only about the testing point of view. We also want the
correspondig util-linux changes upstream - there may (or much more likely
may not) feedback which could require additional changes. Which means we
would going back and forth.

I think it is easiest to move forward with the s390 tree because of this.