Re: regression: Bug 215601 - gcc segv at startup on ia64
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: regression: Bug 215601 - gcc segv at startup on ia64
- From: Magnus Groß <magnus.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 11:46:13 +0100
- Cc: <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <anthony.yznaga@xxxxxxxxxx>, <glaubitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <matoro_bugzilla_kernel@xxxxxxxxx>, <matoro_mailinglist_kernel@xxxxxxxxx>, <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <202202260344.63C15C3356@keescook>
- Ironport-data: A9a23:Ct1+J6rSGyfF9vGdYIms0fXQchleBmJCZRIvgKrLsJaIsI4StFCzt garIBnQMvbYNzT3L9x1bIyw9E8B75KEnIdmHgdtrSFmRSkU+ePIVI+TRqvS04J+DeWeFh49v 5VGAjXkBJppJpMJjk71atANlVEliefQAOOU5NfsYkidfyc9IMsaoU8lyrZRbrJA24DjWVvX4 4yq+aUzBXf8s9JKGjNMg068gE431BjCkGtwUosWPK0jUPf2zhH5PbpHTU2DByKQrrp8QoZWc 93+IISRpQs1yT9wUI//wuajGqE9auW60QCm0hK6UkU56/RIjnRaPq0TbJLwZarL4tmEt4gZ9 TlDiXC/YQV3I4Ltw88MaiECPTB6Y+5o17bbEEHq5KR/z2WeG5ft6+9xEEE7LcgDpqN+R3tR6 fxdITxLYh3ra+CemennDLA33oJ5co+yYt93VnJIlFk1Cd4jSJ/FXr6M6sVfxywYnN9SHbPXb sEZZDwpYBmojxhnYQ9OUc5hzI9EgFGnfS9Vi13EoZEJ2DLsjw02wJaqFcX8L4niqcJ92xzwS nj912f0DwoRM9uc4TGF6HWph/LK2yThV+o6Hb6g89ZugVuO1ikdDwAQWVKnoP6/zEmkVLp3I koI+i0ovO4j5kqiQdDVWAexq3qJ+BUbXrJ4HOkz9QuM1rj8+waIHWkHCDBcLdYrrss3Q3om2 zehm9LvGCwqvqaZRGyQ8p+Koj6ofysYN2kPYWkDVwRty93ippwjyxPGEIpLDqG4lJv2FCv2z jTMqzIx750XjMgWx+C48ErBjjaEuJfEVEg26x/RU2bj6Rl2DKagbpCv81/s5+tPPoedSlC2v 3UencWaxOUHEZaXk2qRQ40lGbi14OyCBzjVgFpuGZYl9i+xzH2uZ4Zd5Bl7LVtuKMFCZTyBS FXethlc/4RSO32xRat6boexFsUxi6nmG9ONfurZYcBDeYNwcwmc1CVvflKLmWTsllU8160yJ /+zb8e2Cl4IBKJm0nyyRuEAwfks3C942GC7eHzg5w64zbqTdDuOFfIMdkGRcuB85a/CrAi9H 8tjCvZmAi53CIXWChQ7O6ZKRbzWBRDX3azLlvE=
- Ironport-hdrordr: A9a23:OoMEaKNht6N59sBcTsSjsMiBIKoaSvp037Eqv3ofdfVwSL37qy nOpoV56faaslwssR0b9OxofZPwJE80lqQU3WByB9aftWDd0QPCEGgL1/qH/9SKIUPDH4BmuZ uJJMNFebvN5A9B/KHH3DU=
> When the kernel tries to map these with a combined allocation, it asks
> for a giant mmap of the file, but the file is, of course, not at all
> that large, and the mapping is rejected.
> So... I'm trying to think about how best to deal with this. If I or
> anyone else can't think of an elegant solution, I'll send a revert for
> the offending patch next week.
Shouldn't we just be able to patch total_mapping_size() again to instead
sum up all p_memsz fields, instead of comparing minimum and maximum
p_vaddr?
Runtime complexity would be the same as we are iterating through all
segments already anyway. And I would also argue that is the behaviour
that one wanted to see in that function anyway.
If you agree with this, I can post a patch, but I would need to know
what tree to base it on to avoid merge conflicts with the just merged
patch from Alexey.
--
Magnus
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]