> On Jul 14, 2022, at 11:15 AM, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. vger dropped my patch again. :( > But > please do not build a new allocator on top of vmalloc code. We have > three different ones what make things to be complicated :) It was a bpf_prog_pack like allocator, but named as vmalloc_exec(), vfree_exec(). I guess I have got enough NAKs for it. Thanks, Song
