[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNNhG4VuGq2_kocsTD3CnCv-Y4Kvnz7_VuvZ9Eug+-T=Eg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 20:31:35 +0200
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...il.com>
Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: Odd-sized kmem_cache_alloc and slub_debug=Z
On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 at 21:06, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...il.com> wrote:
...
> Yeah, it reproduces with defconfig too, as long as you remember to
> pass "slub_debug=Z"... :-/
>
> The following seems to be the culprit:
>
> commit 3202fa62fb43087387c65bfa9c100feffac74aa6
> Author: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Date: Wed Apr 1 21:04:27 2020 -0700
>
> slub: relocate freelist pointer to middle of object
>
> Reverting this commit and one of it's follow up fixes from Kees from
> v5.8 makes the issue go away for me. Btw, please note that caches with
> size 24 and larger do not trigger this bug, so the issue is that with
> small enough object size, we're stomping on allocator metadata (I
> assume part of the freelist).
Was there a patch to fix this? Checking, just in case I missed it.
Thanks,
-- Marco
Powered by blists - more mailing lists