linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Quick vmalloc vs kmalloc fix to the case where array size is too large

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]

Date:	Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:04:32 -0700
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Benjamin Blum <bblum@...gle.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	serue@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Quick vmalloc vs kmalloc fix to the case where array 
	size is too large

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 8:53 PM, KAMEZAWA
Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hmm, ok...then, if too much pids, you hit vmalloc()/vfree() problem again.
> So, it's not good idea to use vmalloc/vfree here after all.
>

Agreed, using vmalloc()/vfree() isn't a perfect solution, but at least
the approach of kmalloc() for small allocations and vmalloc() for
larger allocations solves the current problem (reading tasks/procs
files can fail due to lack of contiguous kmalloc memory) without
introducing overhead in the typical case.

Paul
--
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/