linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 0/3] Enhance sysfs handling for memory hotplug in weighted interleave

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: <6801839a2481_71fe29462@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 15:41:30 -0700
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@...com>
CC: <gourry@...rry.net>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, <joshua.hahnjy@...il.com>,
	<dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	<david@...hat.com>, <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, <osalvador@...e.de>,
	<kernel_team@...ynix.com>, <honggyu.kim@...com>, <yunjeong.mun@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/3] Enhance sysfs handling for memory hotplug in
 weighted interleave

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 17:10:08 +0900 Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@...com> wrote:
> 
> > I sincerely apologize for causing repeated inconvenience. The series of
> > patches version v8 that was merged into -mm, mm-new today needs
> > additional corrections.
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/6800742de6315_130fd2949c@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch/
> > Therefore, I have updated a new version v9, in which the problems have
> > been addressed.
> 
> No probs, this is why mm.git workflow (mm-new -> mm-unstable ->
> mm-stable -> mainline) operates as it does - to easily permit revisions
> and replacements as patches move towards their final state.
> 
> Please note that I added a cc:stable to your [1/N] patch - sysfs leaks
> should be fixed in earlier kernels.  I considered this to be low
> priority - if it's higher priority than this patch should best have
> been separated from the series, so it can take a different merge path
> from the other patches.  

The risk of leak is low because it only appears to trigger if setup
fails. Setup only fails due to -ENOMEM which is unlikely to happen from
a late_initcall() when memory pressure is low.