* Takao Indoh <indou.ta...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> In rb_alloc_aux_page(), a page order is set to MAX_ORDER when order is
> greater than MAX_ORDER, but page order should be less than MAX_ORDER,
> therefore alloc_pages_node fails at least once. This patch fixes page
> order so that it can be always less than MAX_ORDER.
>
> Signed-off-by: Takao Indoh <indou.ta...@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> kernel/events/ring_buffer.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c b/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c
> index 257fa46..3f76fdd 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c
> @@ -502,8 +502,8 @@ static struct page *rb_alloc_aux_page(int node, int order)
> {
> struct page *page;
>
> - if (order > MAX_ORDER)
> - order = MAX_ORDER;
> + if (order >= MAX_ORDER)
> + order = MAX_ORDER - 1;
>
> do {
> page = alloc_pages_node(node, PERF_AUX_GFP, order);
I'm wondering under what circumstances this allocation failure was seen in
practice - why did others not hit this?
Thanks,
Ingo
