linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Cleanup code that think bio_alloc with __GFP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:55:21 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, tytso@....edu,
	adilger@....com, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
	xfs-masters@....sgi.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Cleanup code that think bio_alloc with __GFP_WAIT
	can fail

On Wed, Apr 15 2009, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:
> bio_alloc will not fail when __GFP_WAIT is specified in the gfp_flags.
> See http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/14/198 for the discussion. But this
> not documented and there are places where there is unwanted code to
> handle bio_alloc failure even when __GFP_WAIT is specified. This patch
> set documents this and cleans up various callers who assume bio_alloc
> can fail even with __GFP_WAIT.

I added your patches 2-7, I substituted 1/7 with one I did myself that
uses proper kerneldoc annotation. Thanks!

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/