On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 04:54:40AM +0000, Song Liu wrote: > > > > On Jul 13, 2022, at 9:23 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 03:49:45PM +0000, Song Liu wrote: > >> > >> > >>> On Jul 13, 2022, at 3:08 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> NAK. This is not something that should be an exported public API > >>> ever. > >> > >> Hmm.. I will remove EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (if we ever do a v2 of this..) > > > > Even without that it really is not a vmalloc API anyway. > > This ... > > > Executable > > memory needs to be written first, so we should allocate it in that state > > and only mark it executable after that write has completed. > > ... and this are two separate NAKs. > > For the first NAK, I agree that my version is another layer on top of > vmalloc. But what do you think about Peter's idea? AFAICT, that fits > well in vmalloc logic. > I am not able to find the patch/change to see what you have done. But please do not build a new allocator on top of vmalloc code. We have three different ones what make things to be complicated :) -- Uladzislau Rezki
