On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 23:50 +0200, Adrian-Ken Rueegsegger wrote: > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 02:33, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:24:41PM +0100, michael-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> Pekka Enberg schrieb: > >>>> Even with CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB enabled or with CONFIG_SLUB and > >>>> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON? > >>> no, these options have not been / are not enabled. > >> Can you please try it with those options enabled? That will tell > >> us if there is some latent bug in the crypto layer that only shows > >> up right away under SLOB. > > > > After seeing a posting from Nemoto-san on the linux-mips list (should > > show up soon on > > http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2010-05/threads.html), > > I'm wondering if these defaults are the culprit; > > > > mm/slab.c:#define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN __alignof__(unsigned long long) > > mm/slob.c:#define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN __alignof__(unsigned long) > > mm/slub.c:#define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN __alignof__(unsigned long long) Seems the target here is x86, which has no DMA or other alignment constraints. > Just a quick note: I changed this line in mm/slob.c to (unsigned long > long) and was able to load tcrypt without the kernel oopsing or > panic'ing. When running all test via > > modprobe tcrypt Hmmm, sounds like something in crypto has a bogus alignment/padding expectation. Surprised it wasn't caught by SLAB redzoning though. Perhaps we can 'bisect' the test suite to narrow it down to a particular test. Alternately, we can tweak SLAB to offset buffers by two bytes and see what breaks. Ages ago, I had a simple redzoning patch for SLOB, but I never submitted it: I wrote it to catch bugs in SLOB, not bugs in SLOB users. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
