linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: card: don't use PF

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: <56E976A9.40906@posteo.de>
Date:	Wed, 16 Mar 2016 16:07:21 +0100
From:	Martin Kepplinger <martink@...teo.de>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
	chuanxiao.dong@...el.com, fabf@...net.be
Cc:	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: card: don't use PF_MEMALLOC

Am 2016-03-16 um 15:41 schrieb Jens Axboe:
> On 03/16/2016 04:43 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
>> PF_MEMALLOC is assigned to processes by mm. If drivers prevent memory
>> reclaim and mm is not in control, strange hang-up or OOM Killer
>> invocation
>> could happen.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martink@...teo.de>
>> ---
>> I use MMC cards with this change perfectly fine. As I understand it,
>> even *if* PF_MEMALLOC has a real reason to be here, I think it should
>> be very well documented.
> 
> Did you try swap on mmcblk?
> 

No I haven't even thought about that :) If you know it can be necessary
in that case, it's obviously fine. A comment would still be good though.