linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Introduce GFP_PANIC for early-boot allocations

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, 8 May 2009 13:56:32 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	gorcunov@...nvz.org, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, mel@....ul.ie,
	cl@...ux-foundation.org, riel@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Introduce GFP_PANIC for early-boot allocations

On Fri, 08 May 2009 18:10:28 +0300
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:

> +#define GFP_PANIC	(__GFP_NOFAIL | __GFP_NORETRY)

urgh, you have to be kidding me.  This significantly worsens complexity
and risk in core MM and it's just yuk.

I think we can justify pulling such dopey party tricks to save
pageframe space, or bits in page.flags and such.  But just to save a
scrap of memory which would have been released during boot anwyay? 
Don't think so.

I'd suggest panic_if_null().  Or just leave everything alone - it's
hardly a pressing problem.

--
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/