linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mm: cma: indefinitely retry allocations in cma

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]

Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 16:13:23 -0700
From:   Chris Goldsworthy <cgoldswo@...eaurora.org>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        pratikp@...eaurora.org, pdaly@...eaurora.org,
        sudaraja@...eaurora.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
        Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: cma: indefinitely retry allocations in cma_alloc

On 2020-09-25 05:18, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 24.09.20 07:16, Chris Goldsworthy wrote:
>> -				     GFP_KERNEL | (no_warn ? __GFP_NOWARN : 0));
>> +				     GFP_KERNEL | (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN));
> 
> Right, we definetly don't want to pass the flag further down.
> 
> Alternative would be cma_alloc_nofail(). That helps avoid people 
> passing
>  stuff like GFP_USER and wondering why it doesn't have an effect.

But since we're doing a logical AND with __GFP_NOWARN, we're not passing 
any other values down - this makes it equivalent to the previous 
version, in that only __GFP_NOWARN can be passed to 
alloc_contig_range().

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora 
Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project