linux-ext4 - Re: [patch 1/5] mm: add nofail variants of kmalloc kcalloc and kzalloc

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1008251630270.25660@router.home>
Date:	Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:35:04 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"cluster-devel@...hat.com" <cluster-devel@...hat.com>,
	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	"reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org" <reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] mm: add nofail variants of kmalloc kcalloc and
 kzalloc

On Wed, 25 Aug 2010, David Rientjes wrote:

> It all depends on what flags are passed to kmalloc(), slab nor slub
> enforce __GFP_NOFAIL behavior themselves.  In slab, cache_grow() will
> return NULL depending on whether the page allocator returns NULL, and that
> would only happen for __GFP_NORETRY or
> cachep->gfp->gfporder >= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER.  In slub, the default
> order is tried with __GFP_NORETRY and if it returns NULL, the higher order
> alloc will fail under the same circumstances.  So the nofail behavior for
> slab depends only on the flags passed from the caller.

If the higher order fails in slub then an order 0 alloc is attempted
without __GFP_NORETRY. In both cases the nofail behavior of the page
allocator determines the outcode.

True if the caller mixes in __GFP_NORETRY then you may still get NULL. But
that is an issue that can be resolved by the caller.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html