linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Intel-IOMMU: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in init

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: <1516498672.24895.2.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:37:52 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Jörg Rödel <joro@...tes.org>,
        SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel-IOMMU: Delete an error message for a failed
 memory allocation in init_dmars()

On Sat, 2018-01-20 at 20:40 +0100, Jörg Rödel wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 03:55:37PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Do you need any more background information for this general
> > transformation pattern?
> 
> No.
> 
> > Do you find the Linux allocation failure report insufficient for this
> > use case?
> 
> Yes, because it can't tell me what the code was trying to allocate.

While Markus' commit messages are nearly universally terrible,
is there really any signficant value in knowing when any
particular OOM condition occurs other than the subsystem that
became OOM?

You're going to be hosed in any case.

Why isn't the generic OOM stack dump good enough?