On Sat 30-09-17 20:02:41, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 03:57:27PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: > >On 30 September 2017 at 11:48, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:02:07 +0200 > >> Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote: > >> > >>> > Now that 2 years have passed, and all distros provide gcc that supports > >>> > KASAN, kill kmemcheck again for the very same reasons. > >>> > >>> This is just too large to review manually. How have you generated the > >>> patch? > >> > >> I agree. This needs to be taken out piece by piece, not in one go, > >> where there could be unexpected fallout. > > > >I have a patch from earlier this year that starts by removing the core > >code and defining all the helpers/flags as no-ops so they can be > >removed bit by bit at a later time. See the attachment. Pekka signed > >off on it too. > >e > >I never actually submitted this because I was waiting for MSAN to be > > I'm not sure how much value there is in doing it this way. I agree > that the patch is big, but most of it is simply removing code under > arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck. > > The difference between Vegard's patch and mine is about 300 lines > (out of 2800+), where those 300 lines are simply removing calls to > kmemcheck. There are no logic changes. (so something very similar to > 's/*kmemcheck*//g' would do the trick).
Maybe splitting the patch into three: 1) remove all callers of kmemleak API and 2) remove arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/ and 3) remove leftovers would be slightly easier to review. Maybe 2 and 3 would have some dependencies so they would have to end up in the same path. Just my 2c -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
