On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:29:04 +0200
Michal Hocko wrote:
> 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
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 wrote:
> >> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:02:07 +0200
> >> Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>
> >>> > Now that 2 years have passed, and all distros provide
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 03:57:27PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>On 30 September 2017 at 11:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:02:07 +0200
>> Michal Hocko wrote:
>>
>>> > Now that 2 years have passed, and all distros provide gcc that supports
>>> > KASAN, kill kmemcheck again for
On 30 September 2017 at 11:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:02:07 +0200
> Michal Hocko 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 manuall
On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:02:07 +0200
Michal Hocko 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
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:36:27PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>"Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" writes:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 05:02:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>This is just too large to review manually. How have you generated the
>>>patch?
>>
>> Manualy. Note that most of it (~9
"Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" writes:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 05:02:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>This is just too large to review manually. How have you generated the
>>patch?
>
> Manualy. Note that most of it (~95%) is the result of 'rm
> arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck'.
>
> Otherwise, I just
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 05:02:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>This is just too large to review manually. How have you generated the
>patch?
Manualy. Note that most of it (~95%) is the result of 'rm
arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck'.
Otherwise, I just removed all uses of __GFP_NOWARN/SLAB_NOWARN, and calls
On Wed 27-09-17 11:27:40, Sasha Levin wrote:
> 2 Years ago I proposed to kill kmemcheck:
>
> > As discussed on LSF/MM, kill kmemcheck.
> >
> > KASan is a replacement that is able to work without the limitation of
> > kmemcheck (single CPU, slow). KASan is already upstream.
> >
> > We are also not
I stupidly forgot to Cc Pekka and Vegard, now Cc'ed.
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 11:27:40AM +, Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin) wrote:
>2 Years ago I proposed to kill kmemcheck:
>
>> As discussed on LSF/MM, kill kmemcheck.
>>
>> KASan is a replacement that is able to work without the limitation of
>
2 Years ago I proposed to kill kmemcheck:
> As discussed on LSF/MM, kill kmemcheck.
>
> KASan is a replacement that is able to work without the limitation of
> kmemcheck (single CPU, slow). KASan is already upstream.
>
> We are also not aware of any users of kmemcheck (or users who don't consider
11 matches
Mail list logo
