lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Support for unconditional page sanitization
    On Sun, 24 May 2009 12:19:48 +0200
    pageexec@freemail.hu wrote:

    > On 23 May 2009 at 14:05, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    >
    > > On Sat, 23 May 2009 11:21:41 -0700
    > > "Larry H." <research@subreption.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > > +static inline void sanitize_highpage(struct page *page)
    > >
    > > any reason we're not reusing clear_highpage() for this?
    > > (I know it's currently slightly different, but that is fixable)
    >
    > KM_USER0 users are not supposed to be called from soft/hard irq
    > contexts for high memory pages, something that cannot be guaranteed
    > at this low level of page freeing (i.e., we could be interrupting
    > a clear_highmem and overwrite its KM_USER0 mapping, leaving it dead
    > in the water when we return there). in other words, sanitization
    > must be able to nest within KM_USER*, so that pretty much calls for
    > its own slot.

    no arguement that current clear_highpage isn't a fit. I was more
    thinking about using the content of sanitize_highpage(), and just
    calling that clear_highpage(). (or in other words, improve
    clear_highpage to be usable in more situations)


    --
    Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
    For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
    visit http://www.lesswatts.org


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-05-24 18:41    [W:0.023 / U:1.260 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site