linux-kernel - Re: [S+Q3 00/23] SLUB: The Unified slab allocator (V3)

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1008171229070.12188@router.home>
Date:	Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:29:48 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [S+Q3 00/23] SLUB: The Unified slab allocator (V3)

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote:

> > I'm really curious why nobody else ran into this problem before,
> > especially if they have CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG enabled so
> > struct kmem_cache_node has the same size.  Perhaps my early bug report
> > caused people not to test the series...
>
> Which patches were applied?


If you do not apply all patches then you can be at a stage were
kmalloc_caches[0] is still used for kmem_cache_node. Then things break.
--
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/