linux-kernel - Re: Regression since 2.6.30-rc1

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: <1241039372.4547.3.camel@johannes.local>
Date:	Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:09:32 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Cc:	wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression since 2.6.30-rc1 - Page allocation failures

Hi Larry,

> I have been getting a number of page allocation failures of late on my x86_64
> system. The user-space app that hits the problem varies; however, there is
> always a network connection. In addition, the failure is always of order 1. For
> the instance reported below, git was updating a tree mounted on an NFS volume.
> The problem started with 2.6.30-rc1, but persists with -rc3.
> 
> I have seen the problem with the b43 and p54usb wireless drivers. The user-space
> apps include cc1, git components, and firefox; thus not all involve nfs.
> 
> I will be happy to supply any further information.
> 
> kernel: git: page allocation failure. order:1, mode:0x4020

> kernel:  [<ffffffffa0220711>] ieee80211_skb_resize+0x91/0xc7 [mac80211]
...
> kernel: 427298 pages non-shared

It's a little curious that you have order:1 allocations here. I think
below the printout you showed you would see a line like
	phy0: failed to reallocate TX buffer
Is that there? Could you track down that message in the code (around
net/mac80211/tx.c line 1368) and add to it the following:

	"%d, %d, need %d, %d", skb->data_len, skb->len, head_need, tail_need

and then try to reproduce this problem please? With both p54 and b43 you
should only have packets far smaller than 4096 bytes so no order 1
allocation should be needed, afaict.

johannes

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