netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: skbuff: sprinkle more __GFP

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAL+tcoAokKv9SLrNJksz5Vpgwb_Z4qCPfadFWJnnaBdnBj1xcA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:06:31 +0800
From: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: skbuff: sprinkle more __GFP_NOWARN on
 ingress allocs

On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 10:48 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:52:06 +0800 Jason Xing wrote:
> > > and there's nothing we can do about that. So no point
> > > printing warnings.
> >
> > As you said, we cannot handle it because of that flag, but I wonder if
> > we at least let users/admins know about this failure, like: adding MIB
> > counter or trace_alloc_skb() tracepoint, which can also avoid printing
> > too many useless/necessary warnings. Or else, people won't know what
> > exactly happens in the kernel.
>
> Hm, maybe... I prefer not to add counters and trace points upstream
> until they have sat for a few months in production and proven their
> usefulness.
>
> We also have a driver-level, per device counter already:
> https://docs.kernel.org/next/networking/netlink_spec/netdev.html#rx-alloc-fail-uint
> and I'm pretty sure system level OOM tracking will indicate severe
> OOM conditions as well.

Thanks for your explanation. I see.