linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: replace GFP_ATOMIC with GFP

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: <20190220200359.GB3731@t480-pf1aa2c2>
Date:   Wed, 20 Feb 2019 21:03:59 +0100
From:   Benjamin Block <bblock@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc:     "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Steffen Maier <maier@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: replace GFP_ATOMIC with GFP_KERNEL for sdev
 allocation

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:11:31AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 19:48 +0100, Benjamin Block wrote:
> > We had a test-report where, under memory pressure, adding LUNs to the
> > systems would fail (the tests add LUNs strictly in sequence):
> 
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> There are two more instances of GFP_ATOMIC in scsi_scan.c. Have you verified
> whether or not it is safe to change these into GFP_KERNEL too?
> 

No, I was lazy, but I can take a look tomorrow and fix them up as well
if they are similar to scsi_alloc_sdev().

-- 
With Best Regards, Benjamin Block      /      Linux on IBM Z Kernel Development
IBM Systems & Technology Group   /  IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Vorsitz. AufsR.: Matthias Hartmann       /      Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: AmtsG Stuttgart, HRB 243294