linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] Handle bio

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: <20090414114604.2d552cbb.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:46:04 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	knikanth@...e.de, jens.axboe@...cle.com, neilb@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chris.mason@...cle.com,
	shaggy@...tin.ibm.com, xfs-masters@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Handle bio_alloc failure

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:16:32 -0400
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> wrote:

> In include/linux/page_alloc.h,
> __GFP_NOFAIL is documented as "will never fail", but it says
> absolutely nothing about __GFP_WAIT.

In the present implementation, a __GFP_WAIT allocation for order <=3
will only fail if the caller was oom-killed.

Which raises the question "what happens when a mempool_alloc() caller
gets oom-killed?".

Seems that it will loop around in mempool_alloc() doing weak attempts
to allocate memory, not doing direct reclaim while waiting for someone
else to free something up.  hm.  I guess it'll recover eventually.

--
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/