public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] resource: Use 2-factor allocator calls
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 09:14:50 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180706011450.GB2762@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180705150742.82f6efdf2cd8475a5d94e84a@linux-foundation.org>

Hi Andrew, Kees, 

About the implemention of walk_system_ram_res_rev(), it was posted by
AKASHI firstly for his arm kexec_file adding, later he dropped it
because he took other way and doesn't need walk_system_ram_res_rev() any
more in his patchset.

Then I found my below patch needs a walk_system_ram_res_rev(), 

	kernel/kexec_file.c: load kernel at top of system RAM if required

so I took AKASHI's patch and posted a patchset including above patch,
and AKASHI's patch, it can be seen here:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180322033722.9279-1-bhe@redhat.com

Then Andrew reviewed and added comment to say this
walk_system_ram_res_rev() is not good, and suggested me to change the
singly linked list of child resource to standard list_head which is
doubly linked list, then walk_system_ram_res_rev() can be implemented
very easily to do reversed searching. So I posted v2:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180408024724.16812-1-bhe@redhat.com

Now the latest post is v6:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180704041038.8190-1-bhe@redhat.com


Since changing resource child tree to take doubly linked list list_head
impacts all ARCH and many components, I am still fixing issues test
robot reported since I can only test on x86. Now I plan to ask intel
0day team to tell how I can run scripts locally for all ARCH to find out
all codes impacted and fix them all at one time.

So I think we can drop the old walk_system_ram_res_rev() in v1, I am
still working on this issue. Sorry for the confusion I made because of
my mistakes.

Thanks
Baoquan

On 07/05/18 at 03:07pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:31:53 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
> > As already done treewide, switch from open-coded multiplication to using
> > 2-factor allocation helpers.
> > 
> 
> This is against resource-add-walk_system_ram_res_rev.patch
> (http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180322033722.9279-2-bhe@redhat.com).
> 
> That patch is awaiting (for several months!) a v2.  Will this be happening?

      reply	other threads:[~2018-07-06  1:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-04 17:31 [PATCH] resource: Use 2-factor allocator calls Kees Cook
2018-07-05 22:07 ` Andrew Morton
2018-07-06  1:14   ` Baoquan He [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180706011450.GB2762@MiWiFi-R3L-srv \
    --to=bhe@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox