Hi Rick,
Sorry for the delay, I was a bit preoccupied with $stuff.
On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 06:09:07PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 08:26 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 03:39:26PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 17:29
On Mon, 2023-09-18 at 10:29 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> +/**
> + * struct execmem_range - definition of a memory range suitable for
> code and
> + * related data allocations
> + * @start: address space start
> + * @end: address space end (inclusive)
> + * @pgprot:
On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 08:26 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 03:39:26PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 17:29 -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > > It seems a bit weird to copy all of this. Is it trying to be
> > > faster
> > > or
> > > something?
> > >
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 03:39:26PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 17:29 -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > It seems a bit weird to copy all of this. Is it trying to be faster
> > or
> > something?
> >
> > Couldn't it just check r->start in execmem_text/data_alloc() path and
On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 17:29 -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> It seems a bit weird to copy all of this. Is it trying to be faster
> or
> something?
>
> Couldn't it just check r->start in execmem_text/data_alloc() path and
> switch to EXECMEM_DEFAULT if needed then? The execmem_range_is_data()
> part
On Mon, 2023-09-18 at 10:29 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> +
> +static void execmem_init_missing(struct execmem_params *p)
> +{
> + struct execmem_range *default_range = &p-
> >ranges[EXECMEM_DEFAULT];
> +
> + for (int i = EXECMEM_DEFAULT + 1; i < EXECMEM_TYPE_MAX; i++)
> {
> +
From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)"
Several architectures override module_alloc() only to define address
range for code allocations different than VMALLOC address space.
Provide a generic implementation in execmem that uses the parameters
for address space ranges, required alignment and page protections
7 matches
Mail list logo
