On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08.10.2017 12:16, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> >> This looks fine in general, but a few comments: >> >> - can you split adding the new function from switching over the fork >> codeok > > >> - at least kasan and vmalloc_user/vmalloc_32_user use very similar >> patterns, can you switch them over as well? > > > I don't see why VM_USERMAP cannot be set right at allocation. > > I'll add vm_flags argument to __vmalloc_node() and > pass here VM_USERMAP from vmalloc_user/vmalloc_32_user > in separate patch. > > KASAN is different: it allocates shadow area for area allocated for module. > Pointer to module area must be pushed from module_alloc(). > This isn't worth optimization. > >> - the new __alloc_vm_area looks very different from alloc_vm_area, >> maybe it needs a better name? vmalloc_range_area for example? > > > __vmalloc_area() is vacant - this most low-level, so I'll keep "__". > >> - when you split an existing function please keep the more low-level >> function on top of the higher level one that calls it.ok Did this ever get re-sent? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
