linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] x86/mm: support memory-failure on 32-bits with SPARSEMEM

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: <20251117020956.7071-1-xieyuanbin1@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 10:09:56 +0800
From: Xie Yuanbin <xieyuanbin1@...wei.com>
To: <xieyuanbin1@...wei.com>, <david@...nel.org>, <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	<david@...hat.com>
CC: <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <bp@...en8.de>,
	<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <hpa@...or.com>, <liaohua4@...wei.com>,
	<lilinjie8@...wei.com>, <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, <luto@...nel.org>, <mhocko@...e.com>,
	<mingo@...hat.com>, <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
	<rppt@...nel.org>, <surenb@...gle.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	<tony.luck@...el.com>, <vbabka@...e.cz>, <will@...nel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] x86/mm: support memory-failure on 32-bits with SPARSEMEM

On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 17:05:36 +0800, Xie Yuanbin wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 09:12:04 +0100, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> Let me clarify what we need to know:
>>
>> Will you (or your employer) be running such updated 32bit kernels on
>> hardware that supports MCEs.
>>
>> In other words: is this change driver by *real demand*
>
> Thanks! Asking like this, I completely understand now.
>
> We won't directly upgrade the kernel to 6.18.x (or later versions) to use
> this feature, but if Linux community approves these patches, we will
> backport it to 5.10.x and use it. I know that the page-flags in 5.10.x
> have been exhausted, but we can work around them by adjusting
> SECTION_SIZE_BITS/MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS to free up a page flag.
> Another patch I submitted for arm32:
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20250922021453.3939-1-xieyuanbin1@huawei.com
> , follows the same logic.
>
> Currently, there is a clear demand for ARM32, while the demand for x86 is
> still under discussion.
>
>> or just by "oh
>> look, we can enable that now, I can come up with a theoretical use case
>> but I don't know if anybody would actually care"?
>
> It can also be said that way. In fact, when developing the demand
> "support MEMORY_FAILURE for 32-bit OS" in version 5.10.x, I found that the
> latest version already supported this feature, so I submitted these
> patches, and hope others can benefit from it as well.

Hello, David Hildenbrand and Dave Hansen!

Do you have any other comments on this patch? If you think that
supporting memory-failure on x86_32 is meaningless, I will only submit
patch 2 in the v3 patches.

Thank you very much!

Xie Yuanbin