linux-kernel - Re: [patch] mm: add comment about deprecation of __GFP

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]

Date:	Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:03:50 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@...e.cz>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: add comment about deprecation of __GFP_NOFAIL

On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:

> I hope no 3rd vendor (proprietary) driver uses __GFP_NOFAIL, they tend to
> believe API is trustable and unchanged.
> 

I hope they don't use it with GFP_ATOMIC, either, because it's never been 
respected in that context.  We can easily audit the handful of cases in 
the kernel that use __GFP_NOFAIL (it takes five minutes at the max) and 
prove that none use it with GFP_ATOMIC or GFP_NOFS.  We don't need to add 
multitudes of warnings about using a deprecated flag with ludicrous 
combinations (does anyone really expect GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_NOFAIL to work 
gracefully)?
--
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/