linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][alpha] saner vmalloc handling (was Re: [Bug report] hash_name() may cross page boundary and trigger sleep in RCU context)

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: <CAHk-=wjhgYWmSA0zyXxWr+5T5y_aLWkZLXj0i+xyhVz0Q4jL7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2025 14:16:13 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][alpha] saner vmalloc handling (was Re: [Bug report]
 hash_name() may cross page boundary and trigger sleep in RCU context)

On Sat, 29 Nov 2025 at 19:01, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> +         Default is 8Gb total and under normal circumstances, this is so
> +         far and above what is needed as to be laughable.  However, there are
> +         certain applications (such as benchmark-grade in-kernel web serving)
> +         that can make use of as much vmalloc space as is available.

I wonder if we even need the config variable?

Because this reads like the whole feature exists due to the old 'tux'
web server thing (from the early 2000's - long long gone, never merged
upstream).

So I'm not sure there are any actual real use-cases for tons of
vmalloc space on alpha.

Anyway, I see no real objections to the patch, only a "maybe it could
be cut down even more".

                Linus