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  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]
Date:   Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:34:46 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc:     hch@....de, mgorman@...e.de, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mm, vmscan: account the number of isolated
 pagesper zone

On Wed 25-01-17 19:33:59, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > I think we are missing a check for fatal_signal_pending in
> > iomap_file_buffered_write. This means that an oom victim can consume the
> > full memory reserves. What do you think about the following? I haven't
> > tested this but it mimics generic_perform_write so I guess it should
> > work.
> 
> Looks OK to me. I worried
> 
> #define AOP_FLAG_UNINTERRUPTIBLE        0x0001 /* will not do a short write */
> 
> which forbids (!?) aborting the loop. But it seems that this flag is
> no longer checked (i.e. set but not used). So, everybody should be ready
> for short write, although I don't know whether exofs / hfs / hfsplus are
> doing appropriate error handling.

Those were using generic implementation before and that handles this
case AFAICS.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists