linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31

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: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0906151148300.11467@gentwo.org>
Date:	Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
	lizf@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu, npiggin@...e.de,
	yinghai@...nel.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31

On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> > OK, I can clean this up, no problem.
>
> Actually, there's a slight complication here. If I push gfp mask to
> __might_sleep(), lockdep_trace_alloc() and so on, the mask is
> effective _everywhere_ even outside of slab. Yes, it makes sense if we
> push the masking right down to the page allocator but I wonder if
> that's something we want to do at this point?

__might_sleep just should not trigger right? The mask does not need to be
passed. __might_sleep may be called uselessly during bootup if __GFP_WAIT
is set. But it should not trigger any output. Look at the initial
statements of __might_sleep: They are already prepared to simply return in
the early boot case.


--
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/