From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> Cc: Stewart Smith <stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>, x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Eric Richter <erichte@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Samuel Mendoza-Jonas <sam@mendozajonas.com>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] kexec_file: Allow skipping checksum calculation for some segments. Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:25 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <3959832.c4ESAKX1ch@hactar> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20160822031745.GA30489@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> Am Montag, 22 August 2016, 11:17:45 schrieb Dave Young: > On 08/18/16 at 06:09pm, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Hello Dave, > > > > Thanks for your review! > > > > [ Trimming down Cc: list a little to try to clear the "too many > > recipients"> > > mailing list restriction. ] > > I also got "too many recipients".. Thanks for the trimming. Didn't work though. What is the maximum number of recipients? > > Am Donnerstag, 18 August 2016, 17:03:30 schrieb Dave Young: > > > On 08/13/16 at 12:18am, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > > > Adds checksum argument to kexec_add_buffer specifying whether the > > > > given > > > > segment should be part of the checksum calculation. > > > > > > Since it is used with add buffer, could it be added to kbuf as a new > > > field? > > > > I was on the fence about adding it as a new argument to kexec_add_buffer > > or as a new field to struct kexec_buf. Both alternatives make sense to > > me. I implemented your suggestion in the patch below, what do you > > think?> > > > Like kbuf.no_checksum, default value is 0 that means checksum is > > > needed > > > if it is 1 then no need a checksum. > > > > It's an interesting idea and I implemented it that way, though in > > practice all current users of struct kexec_buf put it on the stack so > > the field needs to be initialized explicitly. > > No need to set it as false because it will be initialized to 0 by > default? As far as I know, variables on the stack are not initialized. Only global and static variables are. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> Cc: Stewart Smith <stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>, x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Samuel Mendoza-Jonas <sam@mendozajonas.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Eric Richter <erichte@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] kexec_file: Allow skipping checksum calculation for some segments. Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:25 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <3959832.c4ESAKX1ch@hactar> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20160822031745.GA30489@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> Am Montag, 22 August 2016, 11:17:45 schrieb Dave Young: > On 08/18/16 at 06:09pm, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Hello Dave, > > > > Thanks for your review! > > > > [ Trimming down Cc: list a little to try to clear the "too many > > recipients"> > > mailing list restriction. ] > > I also got "too many recipients".. Thanks for the trimming. Didn't work though. What is the maximum number of recipients? > > Am Donnerstag, 18 August 2016, 17:03:30 schrieb Dave Young: > > > On 08/13/16 at 12:18am, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > > > Adds checksum argument to kexec_add_buffer specifying whether the > > > > given > > > > segment should be part of the checksum calculation. > > > > > > Since it is used with add buffer, could it be added to kbuf as a new > > > field? > > > > I was on the fence about adding it as a new argument to kexec_add_buffer > > or as a new field to struct kexec_buf. Both alternatives make sense to > > me. I implemented your suggestion in the patch below, what do you > > think?> > > > Like kbuf.no_checksum, default value is 0 that means checksum is > > > needed > > > if it is 1 then no need a checksum. > > > > It's an interesting idea and I implemented it that way, though in > > practice all current users of struct kexec_buf put it on the stack so > > the field needs to be initialized explicitly. > > No need to set it as false because it will be initialized to 0 by > default? As far as I know, variables on the stack are not initialized. Only global and static variables are. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-22 3:25 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2016-08-13 3:18 [PATCH v2 0/6] kexec_file: Add buffer hand-over for the next kernel Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] kexec_file: Add buffer hand-over support " Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] powerpc: " Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 3:21 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 3:21 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 3:38 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 3:38 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 7:22 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 7:22 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 22:21 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 22:21 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] kexec_file: Allow skipping checksum calculation for some segments Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-18 9:03 ` Dave Young 2016-08-18 9:03 ` Dave Young 2016-08-18 21:09 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-18 21:09 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 3:17 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 3:17 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 3:25 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message] 2016-08-22 3:25 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 3:36 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 3:36 ` Dave Young 2016-08-22 3:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 3:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 22:12 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-22 22:12 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] kexec_file: Add mechanism to update kexec segments Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-15 22:27 ` Andrew Morton 2016-08-15 22:27 ` Andrew Morton 2016-08-16 17:00 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-16 17:00 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] kexec: Share logic to copy segment page contents Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] IMA: Demonstration code for kexec buffer passing Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-13 3:18 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-17 2:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] kexec_file: Add buffer hand-over for the next kernel Dave Young 2016-08-17 2:52 ` Dave Young 2016-08-17 4:58 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2016-08-17 4:58 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=3959832.c4ESAKX1ch@hactar \ --to=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=bhe@redhat.com \ --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \ --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \ --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \ --cc=erichte@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=hpa@zytor.com \ --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \ --cc=sam@mendozajonas.com \ --cc=stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \ --cc=x86@kernel.org \ --cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.