linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: If nr

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160112144020.db1cd77e97e41d5c48024c3c@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:40:20 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	nimisolo <nimisolo@...il.com>
Cc:	kuleshovmail@...il.com, penberg@...nel.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
	mgorman@...e.de, tangchen@...fujitsu.com,
	weiyang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: If nr_new is 0 just return

On Sat,  9 Jan 2016 06:33:40 -0500 nimisolo <nimisolo@...il.com> wrote:

> If nr_new is 0 which means there's no region would be added,
> so just return to the caller.
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/memblock.c
> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> @@ -588,6 +588,9 @@ repeat:
>  					       nid, flags);
>  	}
>  
> +	if (!nr_new)
> +		return 0;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * If this was the first round, resize array and repeat for actual
>  	 * insertions; otherwise, merge and return.

hm, why?  Is there something actually wrong with the current code?

Under what circumstances does nr_new==0 actually happen?  Is it a bug
in the caller?