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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <48B5ED2C.60602@snapgear.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Aug 2008 10:11:24 +1000
From:	Greg Ungerer <gerg@...pgear.com>
To:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
CC:	Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...mix.at>,
	Parag Warudkar <parag.lkml@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Alan D. Brunelle" <Alan.Brunelle@...com>,
	"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>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected


Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
>> If you "develop" an embedded system (which is partly system integration
>> of existing apps) to be installed in the field, you don't have that many
>> conceivable work loads compared to a desktop/server system. And you have
>> a fixed list of drivers and applications.
> 
> Hah!  Not in my line of embedded device.
> 
> 32MB no-MMU ARM boards which people run new things and attach new
> devices to rather often - without making new hardware.  Volume's too
> low per individual application to get new hardware designed and made.
> 
> I'm seriously thinking of forwarding porting the 4 year old firmware
> from 2.4.26 to 2.6.current, just to get new drivers and capabilities.
> Backporting is tedious, so's feeling wretchedly far from the mainline
> world.
> 
>> A usual approach is to run stress tests on several (or all)
>> subsystems/services/... in parallel and if the device survives it
>> functioning correctly, it is at least good enough.
> 
> Per application.
> 
> Some little devices run hundreds of different applications and
> customers expect to customise, script themselves, and attach different
> devices (over USB).  The next customer in the chain expects the bits
> you supplied to work in a variety of unexpected situations, even when
> you advise that it probably won't do that.
> 
> Much like desktop/server Linux, but on a small device where silly
> little things like 'create a process' are a stress for the dear little
> thing.
> 
> (My biggest lesson: insist on an MMU next time!)

But given you have hardware you can't change would you choose
to not run Linux, even with the limitations of non-MMU?

Hell no :-)

Regards
Greg


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer  --  Chief Software Dude       EMAIL:     gerg@...pgear.com
Secure Computing Corporation                PHONE:       +61 7 3435 2888
825 Stanley St,                             FAX:         +61 7 3891 3630
Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia         WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
--
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/