From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756282AbZE3IBd (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 May 2009 04:01:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751409AbZE3IB0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 May 2009 04:01:26 -0400 Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1]:46790 "EHLO mail.cs.helsinki.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751181AbZE3IBZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 May 2009 04:01:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4A20E6CF.8070003@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 10:57:03 +0300 From: Pekka Enberg User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Larry H." CC: Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , linux-mm@kvack.org, Ingo Molnar , pageexec@freemail.hu, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level page allocator References: <4A15A8C7.2030505@redhat.com> <20090522073436.GA3612@elte.hu> <20090522113809.GB13971@oblivion.subreption.com> <20090523124944.GA23042@elte.hu> <4A187BDE.5070601@redhat.com> <20090527223421.GA9503@elte.hu> <20090528072702.796622b6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090528090836.GB6715@elte.hu> <20090528125042.28c2676f@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <84144f020905300035g1d5461f9n9863d4dcdb6adac0@mail.gmail.com> <20090530075033.GL29711@oblivion.subreption.com> In-Reply-To: <20090530075033.GL29711@oblivion.subreption.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Larry H. wrote: > Furthermore, selective clearing doesn't solve the roots of the problem. > It's just adding bandages to a wound which never stops bleeding. I > proposed an initial page flag because we could use it later for > unconditional page clearing doing a one line change in a header file. > > I see a lot of speculation on what works and what doesn't, but > there isn't much on the practical side of things, yet. I provided test > results that proved some of the comments wrong, and I've referenced > literature which shows the reasoning behind all this. What else can I do > to make you understand you are missing the point here? Hey, if you want to add a CONFIG_ZERO_ALL_MEMORY_PARANOIA thing that can be disabled, go for it! But you have to find someone else to take the merge the SLAB bits because, quite frankly, I am not convinced it's worth it. And the hand waving you're doing here isn't really helping your case, sorry. Pekka