are returning -ENOMEM to the caller.
> >
> Would it not be better with
>
> char *str;
>
> if ((len == 0) || (len == (u32)-1) || (len >= KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> str = kmalloc(len + 1, flags);
> if (!str)
> return
On Tue 08-08-17 09:34:15, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:58 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri 04-08-17 13:12:04, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > [...]
&
On Fri 04-08-17 13:12:04, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote:
[...]
> > Btw. Should I resend the patch or somebody will take it from this email
> > thread?
>
> No, unless your mailer mangled the patch I shoul
On Thu 03-08-17 14:17:26, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Thu 03-08-17 19:44:46, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[...]
> >> When allocating thread is selected as an OOM victim, it gets TIF_MEMDIE.
> >> Since t
On Thu 03-08-17 19:02:57, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2017/08/03 17:11, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [CC Mel]
> >
> > On Wed 02-08-17 17:45:56, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
On Thu 03-08-17 19:44:46, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 03-08-17 19:02:57, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > On 2017/08/03 17:11, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > [CC Mel]
> > > >
> > > > On Wed 02-08-17 17:45:56, Paul Moore wrote:
[CC Mel]
On Wed 02-08-17 17:45:56, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > while doing something completely unrelated to selinux I've noticed a
> > really strange __GFP_NOMEMALLOC usage pattern in selinux
