linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/cgroup.c add error check

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: <2f11576a0805061319w581f69d4ye593416db6a9e80a@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 May 2008 05:19:45 +0900
From:	"KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>, "Li Zefan" <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/cgroup.c add error check

>  > but if GFP_KERNEL is used, We still need error check, IMHO.
>
>  Yes, but no retry (or if you're sure you cannot fail use __GFP_NOFAIL
>  too, but that is nasty because it has some risk of deadlock under severe
>  oom conditions)

in general coding style, you are right.

but not down-to-earth idea in that case.
call_usermodehelper() is just wrapper of fork-exec.

I don't hope change largely exec() code patch.
--
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/