linux-kernel - Re: Problem: Out of memory after 2days with 2GB RAM

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: <1213292812.3730.21.camel@johannes.berg>
Date:	Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:46:52 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Tomas Winkler <tomasw@...il.com>
Cc:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	yi.zhu@...el.com, reinette.chatre@...el.com,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Problem: Out of memory after 2days with 2GB RAM

> > Well, I disagree, and I'll push my patch as soon as somebody confirms
> > that it doesn't break anything.
> 
> Remember you are not a maintainer of this driver and second we are
> open to all suggestions you don't have to use this kind of
> statements...

Yeah, you're right, I can't really do that. But I can submit the patch
to akpm, and I'm sure he'll take it after you provide your counter
argument about hope never dying again ;)

Frankly, I don't see why you're so opposed to this patch even if it
doesn't solve anything it probably leads to better code generation and
using a lot less memory.

Also, I know you cannot actually need those descriptors since mac80211
will never ever pass such frames, and _that_ is an area I do have at
least some influence over, so I'll surely notice when that changes.

> >> > There was already discussion on LKML about memory allocation problems
> >> > on X86_64, which might explain this regression. This didn't happen
> >> > before.
> >>
> >> This is  the thread title if you are interested.
> >> 'x86/kernel/pci_dma.c: gfp |= __GFP_NORETRY'
> >
> > Like I said, it doesn't matter, there's no need to _waste_
> > 18*256*sizeof(void *) bytes memory.
> 
> It does matter this is not pci allocation we are saving in your patch.

Well, thing is, my patch saves 18 KiB memory on 32-bit and 36 on 64-bit,
so I think we should merge it regardless. Yes, the pci allocation is
icky, and yes, it would be good to just do it once instead of over and
over again, but even if you change it to do _all_ those allocations just
once we should not be wasting those 18/36 KiB memory for nothing.

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)