linux-kernel - Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080826192848.GA20653@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:28:48 -0400
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
	"Alan D. Brunelle" <Alan.Brunelle@...com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c -
	bisected

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:09:46PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

 > If you want the default kernel to support 4k cores, we'll need to fix the 
 > stack usage.  I don't think that is impossible, but IT IS NOT GOING TO 
 > HAPPEN for 2.6.27.
 > 
 > And quite frankly, if some vendor like RedHat enables NR_CPUS=4096 by 
 > default, they are totally and utterly crazy.

heh.  *picks through Fedora changelog*

* Thu Aug 14 2008 Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
- Bump max cpus supported on x86-64 to 4096. Just to see what happens.

I never did get to find out unfortunatly, because of the security fiasco
in Fedora infrastructure the last week or two.

 > But some SGI-specific binary that is meant for SGI machines only, and has 
 > been extensively tested with the setup used on SGI machines is a different 
 > thing.

Every extra kernel image a distro vendor ends up shipping has an associated cost.

* build time: It currently takes about 2 hours for a set of Fedora RPMs.
  For RHEL it'll be even worse due to the extra archs).
  Killing off -smp specific builds was a big win for us in this regard.
  Adding extra flavours is always painful.

* diskspace (distro kernels aren't small. With the associated debugging symbols,
   they take up a shitload of disk space really fast).

* Having everyone running the same kernel makes it much easier to test/debug.
  Our QA guys hate adding extra columns to their test matrix.

But yes, for this to be even remotely feasible, there has to be a negligable
performance cost associated with it, which right now, we clearly don't have.
Given that the number of people running 4096 CPU boxes even in a few years time
will still be tiny, punishing the common case is obviously absurd.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
--
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/