[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 17:08:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: sam@...nborg.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, cl@...ux.com,
penberg@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slab: Fix off by one in object max number tests.
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 23:05:07 +0200
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:57:56PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
>> Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 16:20:04 -0400 (EDT)
>>
>> >
>> > If freelist_idx_t is a byte, SLAB_OBJ_MAX_NUM should be 255 not 256,
>> > and likewise if freelist_idx_t is a short, then it should be 65535 not
>> > 65536.
>> >
>> > Fixes: a41adfa ("slab: introduce byte sized index for the freelist of a slab")
>> > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
>> > ---
>> >
>> > This was leading to all kinds of random crashes on sparc64 where PAGE_SIZE
>> > is 8192. One problem shown was that if spinlock debugging was enabled,
>> > we'd get deadlocks in copy_pte_range() or do_wp_page() with the same cpu
>> > already holding a lock it shouldn't hold, or the lock belonging to a
>> > completely unrelated process.
>>
>> It turns out that after some more testing, I'm still getting spinlock
>> debugging problems with this fix applied.
>>
>> The change is still very much correct I think, however.
>
> There is a related patch in this area which I think is not yet applied.
>
> See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/18/28
>
> Maybe this is realted.
Thanks, I'm testing with that patch added as well.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists