linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] netfilter: account ebt_table

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: <20190110094142.GI31793@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 10:41:42 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
Cc:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+7713f3aa67be76b1552c@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] netfilter: account ebt_table_info to kmemcg

On Thu 10-01-19 12:22:09, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
[...]
> >> diff --git a/net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c b/net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c
> >> index 491828713e0b..5e55cef0cec3 100644
> >> --- a/net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c
> >> +++ b/net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c
> >> @@ -1137,14 +1137,16 @@ static int do_replace(struct net *net, const void __user *user,
> >>  	tmp.name[sizeof(tmp.name) - 1] = 0;
> >>  
> >>  	countersize = COUNTER_OFFSET(tmp.nentries) * nr_cpu_ids;
> >> -	newinfo = vmalloc(sizeof(*newinfo) + countersize);
> >> +	newinfo = __vmalloc(sizeof(*newinfo) + countersize, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT,
> >> +			    PAGE_KERNEL);
> 
> Do we need GFP_HIGHMEM here?

No. vmalloc adds __GPF_HIGHMEM implicitly (see __vmalloc_area_node).

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs