Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751850AbdHROs5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 18 Aug 2017 10:48:57 -0400
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([194.213.3.17]:33413 "EHLO
        lhrrgout.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751055AbdHROsz (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 18 Aug 2017 10:48:55 -0400
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC] memory allocations in genalloc
To: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
        Jes Sorensen <jes@trained-monkey.org>
CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
        <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
References: <299c22f9-2e34-36dc-a6da-22eadbc0a59d@huawei.com>
 <bea38f28-b311-dd54-9323-f90e2b157e35@redhat.com>
From: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <2d087abd-1bf4-55aa-ac92-67a9b8f9d177@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 17:47:16 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <bea38f28-b311-dd54-9323-f90e2b157e35@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.122.225.51]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0),
        refid=str=0001.0A020205.5996FE3C.010F,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0,
        ip=0.0.0.0,
        so=2013-06-18 04:22:30,
        dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 8ae7dbbe64e890e7480b4d91caef811c
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 391
Lines: 16

Hi,

On 18/08/17 16:57, Laura Abbott wrote:
> Again, if you have a specific patch or
> proposal this would be easier to review.


yes, I'm preparing it and will send it out soon,
but it was somehow surprising to me that it was chosen to implement free
with the size parameter.

It made me think that I was overlooking some obvious reason behind the
choice :-S

--
thanks for answering, igor