Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752665AbcD2Jvj (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 05:51:39 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:34391 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752065AbcD2Jvg (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 05:51:36 -0400
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:51:30 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Lasse Collin <lasse.collin@tukaani.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86/boot: Move compressed kernel to end of
 decompression buffer
Message-ID: <20160429095130.GA29875@gmail.com>
References: <1461888548-32439-1-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
 <1461888548-32439-3-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
 <20160429071805.GC28320@gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5jLyeaUV_Pe7d-GoTdb+PxsTynkGAw+MzK3xd+_gCqbnvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160429080754.GA3881@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160429080754.GA3881@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 984
Lines: 25


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:

> * Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
> > I don't agree. We do still have embedded systems running x86 kernels, and we 
> > have cases where we're running multiple kernels in memory (like kdump). I think 
> > the memory savings is worth the complexity, especially since the complexity is 
> > being reduced up by this patch. [...]
> 
> Hm, so can we quantify it, how much are the temporary memory savings in practice? 
> I'd like to see actual vmlinuz numbers with say a defconfig and with a distro 
> config.

Btw., with the extra explanations added to the changelog I am happy with the 
series and have applied it to x86/boot and pushed it out. If we decide to simplify 
the code it will be much easier to simplify correctly working, well documented 
code.

It would be nice to do another pass at the in-code comments and at the general 
code structure, to make sure all this is properly explained and structured.

Thanks,

	Ingo