[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0000013e564e0e5a-121c52f9-e489-470f-99d5-67a5ad42eb75-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:59:16 +0000
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-next-20130422] Bug in SLAB?
On Mon, 29 Apr 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >> causes no warning at compile time and returns NULL at runtime. But
> >>
> >> unsigned int size = 8 * 1024 * 1024;
> >> kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> >>
> >> causes compile time warning
> >>
> >> include/linux/slab_def.h:136: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
> >>
> >> and runtime bug.
SLAB should have support up to 2 << 25 = 1 mb << 5 = 32M
> I believe this is because the code now always assume that the cache is
> found when a constant is passed. Before this patch, we had a "found"
> statement that was mistakenly removed.
The code in kmalloc_index() creates a BUG() and preferentially should
create a compile time failure when a number that is too big is passed to it.
What is MAX_ORDER on the architecture?
An allocation size of more than MAX_ORDER is not supported by the page
allocator or by slab. It is safe to return NULL in that case.
--
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