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

Date:	Wed, 16 Mar 2016 08:12:27 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To:	Martin Kepplinger <martink@...teo.de>, <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

On 03/16/2016 08:07 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
> 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.

That's why it is there! So yes, adding a comment to that effect would be 
a better path forward.

-- 
Jens Axboe