[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiigmijRQkgAY+JKgjKC-PyB1nc440HvVDxZ5EjrMtkRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 09:59:19 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>
Cc: David Wang <00107082@....com>, catalin.marinas@....com, lance.yang@...ux.dev,
b-padhi@...com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jan Polensky <japo@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 6.18-rc6
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 09:53, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
<david@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> I had the same in mind for a second, but then I looked at
> kernel_init_pages() with the kasan_disable_current() handling and
> concluded that it's clearer to just disallow tag_clear_highpage() being
> abused in the first place and reduce the effective code footprint of
> post_alloc_hook().
See, I had the exact opposite reaction: I think the one-liner is
better not just because it's simpler, but exactly *because* of the
mess that is kernel_init_pages().
IOW, that one-liner is either correct *without* all that crud - and
it's unnecessary for the __GFP_ZEROTAGS case because that only happens
at init time - or it shows a bug in the arm64 code.
Either way it's a win. Either it's simpler, or it gives us better coverage.
No?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists