On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 11:06:42AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
> Subject: net/netfilter/x_tables.c: remove size check
>
> Back in 2002 vmalloc used to BUG on too large sizes. We are much better
> behaved these days and vmalloc simply returns NULL for those. Remove the
> che
On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:44:39 +0100 Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 09:19:16AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > Yeah, we do not BUG but rather fail instead. See __vmalloc_node_range.
> > My excavation tools pointed me to "VM: Rework vmalloc code to support
> > map
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 09:19:16AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> Yeah, we do not BUG but rather fail instead. See __vmalloc_node_range.
> My excavation tools pointed me to "VM: Rework vmalloc code to support mapping
> of arbitray pages"
> by Christoph back in 2002. So yes, we can safely
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 03:39:58PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 30-01-18 15:01:11, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > From d48e950f1b04f234b57b9e34c363bdcfec10aeee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: Michal Hocko
> > > Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:51:07 +0100
> > > Subject: [PATCH] net/netfilter/x
On Tue 30-01-18 11:27:45, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:01:04 +0100 Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > Well, this is not about syzkaller, it merely pointed out a potential
> > > DoS... And that has to be addressed somehow.
> >
> > So how about this?
> > ---
>
> argh ;)
doh, those hard
On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:01:04 +0100 Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Well, this is not about syzkaller, it merely pointed out a potential
> > DoS... And that has to be addressed somehow.
>
> So how about this?
> ---
argh ;)
> >From d48e950f1b04f234b57b9e34c363bdcfec10aeee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From
On Tue 30-01-18 15:01:11, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > From d48e950f1b04f234b57b9e34c363bdcfec10aeee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Michal Hocko
> > Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:51:07 +0100
> > Subject: [PATCH] net/netfilter/x_tables.c: make allocation less aggressive
>
> Acked-by: Florian Westph
> From d48e950f1b04f234b57b9e34c363bdcfec10aeee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:51:07 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] net/netfilter/x_tables.c: make allocation less aggressive
Acked-by: Florian Westphal
On Tue 30-01-18 10:57:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 30-01-18 10:02:34, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > >> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, F
On Tue 30-01-18 10:02:34, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> >> Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> >> > > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
On Tue 30-01-18 09:11:27, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here.
> > > > Not sure what exactly.
> > >
> > > Would memcg he
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
>> Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
>> > > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>> > [...]
>> > > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here.
> > > > Not sure what exactly.
> > >
> >
Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> [...]
> > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here.
> > > Not sure what exactly.
> >
> > Would memcg help?
>
> That really depends. I would have to check whether vmallo
On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
[...]
> > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here.
> > Not sure what exactly.
>
> Would memcg help?
That really depends. I would have to check whether vmalloc path obeys
__GFP_ACCOUNT (I suspect i
Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:57:22PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:23:57AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > > > vmalloc() once became killable by commit 5d17a73a2ebeb8d1 ("vmalloc:
> > > > > back
> > >
On Monday 2018-01-29 17:57, Florian Westphal wrote:
>> > > vmalloc() once became killable by commit 5d17a73a2ebeb8d1 ("vmalloc: back
>> > > off when the current task is killed") but then became unkillable by
>> > > commit
>> > > b8c8a338f75e052d ("Revert "vmalloc: back off when the current task i
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:57:22PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:23:57AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > > vmalloc() once became killable by commit 5d17a73a2ebeb8d1 ("vmalloc:
> > > > back
> > > > off when the current task is killed
On Mon 29-01-18 17:57:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:23:57AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > > vmalloc() once became killable by commit 5d17a73a2ebeb8d1 ("vmalloc:
> > > > back
> > > > off when the current task is killed") but then beca
Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:23:57AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > vmalloc() once became killable by commit 5d17a73a2ebeb8d1 ("vmalloc: back
> > > off when the current task is killed") but then became unkillable by commit
> > > b8c8a338f75e052d ("Revert "vmalloc: b
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:23:57AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > vmalloc() once became killable by commit 5d17a73a2ebeb8d1 ("vmalloc: back
> > off when the current task is killed") but then became unkillable by commit
> > b8c8a338f75e052d ("Revert "vmalloc: back off when the current task is
>
Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> syzbot wrote:
> > syzbot hit the following crash on net-next commit
> > 6bb46bc57c8e9ce947cc605e555b7204b44d2b10 (Fri Jan 26 16:00:23 2018 +)
> > Merge branch 'cxgb4-fix-dump-collection-when-firmware-crashed'
> >
> > C reproducer is attached.
> > syzkaller reproducer is
syzbot wrote:
> syzbot hit the following crash on net-next commit
> 6bb46bc57c8e9ce947cc605e555b7204b44d2b10 (Fri Jan 26 16:00:23 2018 +)
> Merge branch 'cxgb4-fix-dump-collection-when-firmware-crashed'
>
> C reproducer is attached.
> syzkaller reproducer is attached.
> Raw console output is a
23 matches
Mail list logo