[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161216220235.GD7645@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 23:02:35 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Cristopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bpf: do not use KMALLOC_SHIFT_MAX
On Fri 16-12-16 10:02:10, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 05:47:21PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> >
> > 01b3f52157ff ("bpf: fix allocation warnings in bpf maps and integer
> > overflow") has added checks for the maximum allocateable size. It
> > (ab)used KMALLOC_SHIFT_MAX for that purpose. While this is not incorrect
> > it is not very clean because we already have KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE for this
> > very reason so let's change both checks to use KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE instead.
> >
> > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
>
> Nack until the patches 1 and 2 are reversed.
I do not insist on ordering. The thing is that it shouldn't matter all
that much. Or are you worried about bisectability?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists