linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] mm: Introduce 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 08 May 2009 16:50:07 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, cl@...ux.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, mel@....ul.ie, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	riel@...hat.com, rientjes@...gle.com, xemul@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] mm: Introduce GFP_PANIC for non-failing
 allocations

On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 17:37 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> Thanks Pekka! At moment it's usefull for x86 uv_system_init (3 times)
> for early boot code. Plain panic_on_null (suggested by Andrew) could
> be usefull as well but would lead to additional wrapper around kmalloc
> which is already inlined. Which means -- at moment we have those cases
> handled by BUG_ON but having one common option would be better I guess
> (ie have an ability to say page allocator that just do panic on fail).
> 
> Anyway, if there is still objections on such an approach (even having
> gpf bits saved by elegant way Pekka suggested) -- I'm fine with having
> those BUG_ONs instead of short and gracious GFP_PANIC :)

There are such BUG_ONs in SLUB, for example, and probably elsewhere in
early-boot code.

			Pekka

--
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/