Hi, On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 09:19:16AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > Yeah, we do not BUG but rather fail instead. See __vmalloc_node_range. > My excavation tools pointed me to "VM: Rework vmalloc code to support mapping of arbitray pages" > by Christoph back in 2002. So yes, we can safely remove it finally. Se > below. > > > From 8d52e1d939d101b0dafed6ae5c3c1376183e65bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 09:16:56 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] net/netfilter/x_tables.c: remove size check > > Back in 2002 vmalloc used to BUG on too large sizes. We are much better > behaved these days and vmalloc simply returns NULL for those. Remove > the check as it simply not needed and the comment even misleading. > > Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > --- > net/netfilter/x_tables.c | 4 ---- > 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/x_tables.c b/net/netfilter/x_tables.c > index b55ec5aa51a6..48a6ff620493 100644 > --- a/net/netfilter/x_tables.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/x_tables.c > @@ -999,10 +999,6 @@ struct xt_table_info *xt_alloc_table_info(unsigned int size) > if (sz < sizeof(*info)) > return NULL; > > - /* Pedantry: prevent them from hitting BUG() in vmalloc.c --RR */ > - if ((SMP_ALIGN(size) >> PAGE_SHIFT) + 2 > totalram_pages) > - return NULL; > - > /* __GFP_NORETRY is not fully supported by kvmalloc but it should > * work reasonably well if sz is too large and bail out rather > * than shoot all processes down before realizing there is nothing Patchwork didn't catch this patch for some reason, would you mind to resend? Thanks! -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
