On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 02:48:19PM +0300, Haggai Eran wrote:
> On 26/08/2014 00:07, Shawn Bohrer wrote:
> The following patch fixes the issue by storing the mm_struct of the
> >> >
> >> > You are doing more than just storing the mm_struct - you are taking
> >> > a reference to the process'
On 26/08/2014 00:07, Shawn Bohrer wrote:
The following patch fixes the issue by storing the mm_struct of the
>> >
>> > You are doing more than just storing the mm_struct - you are taking
>> > a reference to the process' mm. This can lead to a massive resource
>> > leakage. The reason is bit
On 26/08/2014 00:07, Shawn Bohrer wrote:
The following patch fixes the issue by storing the mm_struct of the
You are doing more than just storing the mm_struct - you are taking
a reference to the process' mm. This can lead to a massive resource
leakage. The reason is bit complex: The
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 02:48:19PM +0300, Haggai Eran wrote:
On 26/08/2014 00:07, Shawn Bohrer wrote:
The following patch fixes the issue by storing the mm_struct of the
You are doing more than just storing the mm_struct - you are taking
a reference to the process' mm. This can lead
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:20:34AM +, Shachar Raindel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm afraid this patch, in its current form, will not work.
> See below for additional comments.
Thanks for the input Shachar. I've tried to answer your questions
below.
> > > In debugging an application that receives
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:20:34AM +, Shachar Raindel wrote:
Hi,
I'm afraid this patch, in its current form, will not work.
See below for additional comments.
Thanks for the input Shachar. I've tried to answer your questions
below.
In debugging an application that receives -ENOMEM
> To: Roland Dreier
> Cc: Christoph Lameter; Sean Hefty; Hal Rosenstock; linux-
> r...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> t...@rgmadvisors.com; Shawn Bohrer
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ib_umem_release should decrement mm->pinned_vm
> from ib_umem_get
>
> On Tue,
Cc: Christoph Lameter; Sean Hefty; Hal Rosenstock; linux-
r...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
t...@rgmadvisors.com; Shawn Bohrer
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ib_umem_release should decrement mm-pinned_vm
from ib_umem_get
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:27:35AM -0500, Shawn Bohrer wrote
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:27:35AM -0500, Shawn Bohrer wrote:
> From: Shawn Bohrer
>
> In debugging an application that receives -ENOMEM from ib_reg_mr() I
> found that ib_umem_get() can fail because the pinned_vm count has
> wrapped causing it to always be larger than the lock limit even with
>
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:27:35AM -0500, Shawn Bohrer wrote:
From: Shawn Bohrer sboh...@rgmadvisors.com
In debugging an application that receives -ENOMEM from ib_reg_mr() I
found that ib_umem_get() can fail because the pinned_vm count has
wrapped causing it to always be larger than the lock
From: Shawn Bohrer
In debugging an application that receives -ENOMEM from ib_reg_mr() I
found that ib_umem_get() can fail because the pinned_vm count has
wrapped causing it to always be larger than the lock limit even with
RLIMIT_MEMLOCK set to RLIM_INFINITY.
The wrapping of pinned_vm occurs
From: Shawn Bohrer sboh...@rgmadvisors.com
In debugging an application that receives -ENOMEM from ib_reg_mr() I
found that ib_umem_get() can fail because the pinned_vm count has
wrapped causing it to always be larger than the lock limit even with
RLIMIT_MEMLOCK set to RLIM_INFINITY.
The wrapping
12 matches
Mail list logo
