Re: [Patch] mm/sparse.c: Check the return value of sparse_index_alloc().
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 01:17:02PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: >On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 21:54 +0800, WANG Cong wrote: >> Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure, >> we must deal with the failure condition when calling it. >> >> Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Cc: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Cc: Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> --- >> >> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile >> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c >> index e06f514..d245e59 100644 >> --- a/mm/sparse.c >> +++ b/mm/sparse.c >> @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long >> section_nr, int nid) >> return -EEXIST; >> >> section = sparse_index_alloc(nid); >> +if (!section) >> +return -ENOMEM; >> /* >> * This lock keeps two different sections from >> * reallocating for the same index > >Oddly enough, sparse_add_one_section() doesn't seem to like to check >its allocations. The usemap is checked, but not freed on error. If you >want to fix this up, I think it needs a little more love than just two >lines. Er, right. I missed this point. > >Do you want to try to add some actual error handling to >sparse_add_one_section()? Yes, I will have a try. And memory_present() also doesn't check it. More patches around this will come up soon. Since Andrew has included the above patch, so I won't remake it with others together. Andrew, is this OK for you? Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Patch] mm/sparse.c: Check the return value of sparse_index_alloc().
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 21:54 +0800, WANG Cong wrote: > Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure, > we must deal with the failure condition when calling it. > > Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c > index e06f514..d245e59 100644 > --- a/mm/sparse.c > +++ b/mm/sparse.c > @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long > section_nr, int nid) > return -EEXIST; > > section = sparse_index_alloc(nid); > + if (!section) > + return -ENOMEM; > /* >* This lock keeps two different sections from >* reallocating for the same index Oddly enough, sparse_add_one_section() doesn't seem to like to check its allocations. The usemap is checked, but not freed on error. If you want to fix this up, I think it needs a little more love than just two lines. Do you want to try to add some actual error handling to sparse_add_one_section()? -- Dave - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Patch] mm/sparse.c: Check the return value of sparse_index_alloc().
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 21:54 +0800, WANG Cong wrote: Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure, we must deal with the failure condition when calling it. Signed-off-by: WANG Cong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c index e06f514..d245e59 100644 --- a/mm/sparse.c +++ b/mm/sparse.c @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long section_nr, int nid) return -EEXIST; section = sparse_index_alloc(nid); + if (!section) + return -ENOMEM; /* * This lock keeps two different sections from * reallocating for the same index Oddly enough, sparse_add_one_section() doesn't seem to like to check its allocations. The usemap is checked, but not freed on error. If you want to fix this up, I think it needs a little more love than just two lines. Do you want to try to add some actual error handling to sparse_add_one_section()? -- Dave - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Patch] mm/sparse.c: Check the return value of sparse_index_alloc().
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 01:17:02PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 21:54 +0800, WANG Cong wrote: Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure, we must deal with the failure condition when calling it. Signed-off-by: WANG Cong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c index e06f514..d245e59 100644 --- a/mm/sparse.c +++ b/mm/sparse.c @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long section_nr, int nid) return -EEXIST; section = sparse_index_alloc(nid); +if (!section) +return -ENOMEM; /* * This lock keeps two different sections from * reallocating for the same index Oddly enough, sparse_add_one_section() doesn't seem to like to check its allocations. The usemap is checked, but not freed on error. If you want to fix this up, I think it needs a little more love than just two lines. Er, right. I missed this point. Do you want to try to add some actual error handling to sparse_add_one_section()? Yes, I will have a try. And memory_present() also doesn't check it. More patches around this will come up soon. Since Andrew has included the above patch, so I won't remake it with others together. Andrew, is this OK for you? Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Patch] mm/sparse.c: Check the return value of sparse_index_alloc().
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:54:28 +0800 WANG Cong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure, > we must deal with the failure condition when calling it. > > Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c > index e06f514..d245e59 100644 > --- a/mm/sparse.c > +++ b/mm/sparse.c > @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long > section_nr, int nid) > return -EEXIST; > > section = sparse_index_alloc(nid); > + if (!section) > + return -ENOMEM; > /* >* This lock keeps two different sections from >* reallocating for the same index Sure, but both callers of sparse_index_init() ignore its return value anyway. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Patch] mm/sparse.c: Check the return value of sparse_index_alloc().
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:54:28 +0800 WANG Cong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure, we must deal with the failure condition when calling it. Signed-off-by: WANG Cong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c index e06f514..d245e59 100644 --- a/mm/sparse.c +++ b/mm/sparse.c @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long section_nr, int nid) return -EEXIST; section = sparse_index_alloc(nid); + if (!section) + return -ENOMEM; /* * This lock keeps two different sections from * reallocating for the same index Sure, but both callers of sparse_index_init() ignore its return value anyway. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
