[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1909242048020.17661@www.lameter.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 20:52:52 +0000 (UTC)
From: cl@...ux.com
To: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm, sl[aou]b: guarantee natural alignment for
kmalloc(power-of-two)
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, David Sterba wrote:
> As a user of the allocator interface in filesystem, I'd like to see a
> more generic way to address the alignment guarantees so we don't have to
> apply workarounds like 3acd48507dc43eeeb each time we find that we
> missed something. (Where 'missed' might be another sort of weird memory
> corruption hard to trigger.)
The alignment guarantees are clearly documented and objects are misaligned
in debugging kernels.
Looking at 3acd48507dc43eeeb:Looks like no one tested that patch with a
debug kernel or full debugging on until it hit mainline. Not good.
The consequence for the lack of proper testing is to make the production
kernel contain the debug measures?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists