Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 30 May 2009 19:46:44 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level page allocator |
| |
* Larry H. <research@subreption.com> wrote:
> On 10:57 Sat 30 May , Pekka Enberg wrote: > > 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. > > For a second I thought it was Ingo who was writing this e-mail. > Apologies about the confusion.
btw., i find this is rather hillarious: you thought it was me writing the reply and you answered Pekka's arguments with contempt and hand-waving.
Now that you realized that it's the SLAB maintainer you replied to, whom you cannot just hand-wave away, you apologize not for the bogosity of your argument and not for the concept - but you apologize for _thinking it was the wrong person_.
That is a rather dishonest style of discussion.
Ingo
| |