On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 16:24:06 +0200 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 058504edd026 ("fs/seq_file: fallback to vmalloc allocation") is suspected to
> cause a crash. Actually I can't reprocude the crash nor would I be able to
> tell how the commit could cause the crash.
> Anyway, I'll be offline for the next 2.5 weeks. So if Sasha could confirm
> that reverting the patch actually does fix the crash, please revert the
> commit, unless somebody else can make sense of the report of course.
>
> I'm still wondering how Sasha could reproduce the crash.
This really sucks :(
I suppose I'll queue up a revert of 058504edd026 as a for-3.16 bandaid.
Sasha, it would be great if you could delve a bit further into this,
see if we can identify a way for others to reproduce the bug.
Did you test that little patchlet which Heiko sent?
--- a/fs/seq_file.c
+++ b/fs/seq_file.c
@@ -34,12 +34,7 @@ static void seq_set_overflow(struct seq_file *m)
static void *seq_buf_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
- void *buf;
-
- buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
- if (!buf && size > PAGE_SIZE)
- buf = vmalloc(size);
- return buf;
+ return kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
}
/**
It would also be interesting to try the opposite: always use vmalloc().
That may make it easier to trigger the bug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
