linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] random: Fix crashes with sparse node ids

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: <CA+55aFyi9JyFMArYtv_QBRMkp4GjHzmrDA99VrksShR=LwgdWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 30 Jul 2016 20:56:09 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] random: Fix crashes with sparse node ids

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
>
> Dropping NOFAIL means we need to handle allocation failures, which makes
> the patch a bit bigger, and less of a pure fix.

Hmm. If you get allocation failures for something like this at init
time, I think you're basically screwed anyway.

And I really only meant for the initial array allocation, and the
__GFP_ZERO thing.

Yes, __GFP_ZERO does work for kmalloc() too, but unlike the other GPF
flags, we do have special zalloc versions for zeroing that are
generally preferred.

              Linus