linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for non power-of-two bucketsize

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, 18 May 2007 11:21:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for
 non power-of-two bucketsize

On Fri, 18 May 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote:

>  			table = (void*) __get_free_pages(GFP_ATOMIC, order);

ATOMIC? Is there some reason why we need atomic here?

> +			/*
> +			 * If bucketsize is not a power-of-two, we may free
> +			 * some pages at the end of hash table.
> +			 */
> +			if (table) {
> +				unsigned long alloc_end = (unsigned long)table +
> +						(PAGE_SIZE << order);
> +				unsigned long used = (unsigned long)table +
> +						PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> +				while (used < alloc_end) {
> +					free_page(used);

Isnt this going to interfere with the kernel_map_pages debug stuff?

-
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/