linux-kernel - Re: [Intel IOMMU 06/10] Avoid memory allocation failures in dma map api calls

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: <46786668.6050507@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:27:36 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
CC:	"Keshavamurthy, Anil S" <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ak@...e.de, gregkh@...e.de, muli@...ibm.com,
	suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, ashok.raj@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [Intel IOMMU 06/10] Avoid memory allocation failures in dma map
 api calls

Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Keshavamurthy, Anil S wrote:
> 
> 
>> So far in our test scenario, we were unable to create
>> any memory allocation failure inside dma map api calls.
> 
> All these functions should have gfp_t flags passed to them.

why?

> Otherwise you are locked into the use of GFP_ATOMIC.

all callers pretty much are either in irq context or with spinlocks 
held. Good luck..... it's also called primarily from the PCI DMA API 
which doesn't take a gfp_t argument in the first place...

so I'm not seeing the point.
-
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/