linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: check return value of memblock_alloc_node

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: <971266DB-8F42-4189-A561-2C8A708A4D1B@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 06:34:57 -0700
From:   William Kucharski <william.kucharski@...cle.com>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: check return value of
 memblock_alloc_node_nopanic()



> On Jan 17, 2019, at 4:26 AM, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 03:19:35AM -0700, William Kucharski wrote:
>> 
>> This seems very reasonable, but if the code is just going to panic if the
>> allocation fails, why not call memblock_alloc_node() instead?
> 
> I've sent patches [1] that remove panic() from memblock_alloc*() and drop
> _nopanic variants. After they will be (hopefully) merged,
> memblock_alloc_node() will return NULL on error.
> 
>> If there is a reason we'd prefer to call memblock_alloc_node_nopanic(),
>> I'd like to see pgdat->nodeid printed in the panic message as well.
> 
> Sure.

Thanks for the quick response.

Reviewed-by: William Kucharski <william.kucharski@...cle.com>