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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20180404152713.GM6312@dhcp22.suse.cz> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 17:27:13 +0200 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Cc: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-patch-test@...ts.linaro.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] kernel/trace:check the val against the available mem On Wed 04-04-18 11:04:42, Steven Rostedt wrote: [...] > I'm not looking for perfect. In fact, I love what si_mem_available() > gives me now! Sure, it can say "there's enough memory" even if I can't > use it. Because most of the OOM allocations that happen with increasing > the size of the ring buffer isn't due to "just enough memory > allocated", but it's due to "trying to allocate crazy amounts of > memory". That's because it does the allocation one page at a time, and > if you try to allocate crazy amounts of memory, it will allocate all > memory before it fails. I don't want that. I want crazy allocations to > fail from the start. A "maybe this will allocate" is fine even if it > will end up causing an OOM. OK, fair enough. It's your code ;) I would recommend using the oom_origin thingy to reduce the immediate damage and to have a clear culprit so that I do not have to scratch my head why we see an OOM report with a lot of unaccounted memory... I am afraid I cannot help you much more though. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists