linux-kernel - Re: percpu allocator vs reclaim

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: <49AEAEF2.7040908@kernel.org>
Date:	Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:40:18 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: percpu allocator vs reclaim

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi Tejun,
> 
> Thomas hit the below on recent -tip kernels.
> 
> Which basically states that we could deadlock due to reclaim lock
> recursion.
> 
> Looking at the code I don't see a quick solution, other than using
> GFP_NOFS, which is a bit of a bother (as I suspect it might easily grow
> __GFP_IO inversion too, if it doesn't already have it).

Ah... maybe percpu allocator should just swallow @gfp.  Any better
ideas? :-(

-- 
tejun
--
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/