| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201010292018.26776.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:18:26 +1030 From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] kdb: avoid on-stack cpumask, old-style accessors On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:14:32 pm Jason Wessel wrote: > On 10/27/2010 05:00 AM, Rusty Russell wrote: > > That's quite a big stack already; I assume moving it to a static bitmap > > is OK for this usage (a cpumask_var_t might require kmalloc, not sure > > that's a good idea here). > > > > > Hi Rusty, > > This patch seems fine to me, and I'll gladly put it in the merge queue. Thanks! > The kdb shell has a 2 phase initialization, in order to support early > debugging (before the kernel allocators are ready as well as before > console init). In the later initialization phase, kmalloc() is > available. We could return an error up until the structure is allocated > by the kdb late init phase. It is also possible to avoid allocating the > structure at all if kdb is not configured and free it if you deactivate kdb. We could, or look harder at that code to see if the mask is really needed? Thanks, Rusty. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists