linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: zcache: fix possible sleep under lock

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: <20110822211035.GB12248@shale.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:10:36 +0300
From:	Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
To:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	gregkh@...e.de, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	dan.magenheimer@...cle.com, ascardo@...oscopio.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: zcache: fix possible sleep under lock

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 02:49:45PM -0500, Seth Jennings wrote:
> Actually, should this be GFP_ATOMIC or GFP_NOWAIT?
> 

GFP_ATOMIC is sort of a good default answer.

GFP_NOWAIT is normally used when you want to do something really
fast and if the allocation fails, you don't want to wait for it.
So if memory is short, and you drop a packet?  Who cares!  TCP has
error handling built in.  Other than that, GFP_NOWAIT is used a lot
in the core kernel.

You could be right that GFP_NOWAIT is fine here.  I don't know zcache
well enough to say.  How bad is it if the allocation fails?

regards,
dan carpenter
--
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/