On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 03:10:45PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 11:00:54AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > @@ -8529,6 +8535,12 @@ mpt3sas_base_attach(struct MPT3SAS_ADAPTER *ioc)
> > ioc->pend_os_device_add_sz = (ioc->facts.MaxDevHandle / 8);
> > if (ioc->facts.MaxDevHandle % 8)
> > ioc->pend_os_device_add_sz++;
> > +
> > + /* pend_os_device_add_sz should have, at least, the minimal room
> > + * for set_bit()/test_bit(), otherwise out-of-memory may occur
> > + */
> > + ioc->pend_os_device_add_sz = ALIGN(ioc->pend_os_device_add_sz,
> > + sizeof(unsigned long));
> > ioc->pend_os_device_add = kzalloc(ioc->pend_os_device_add_sz,
> > GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (!ioc->pend_os_device_add) {
> Do we need similiar ALIGN for _base_check_ioc_facts_changes() too?
Yes, that would help as well. Since it will protect
->device_remove_in_progress and others from the same problem.
Let me send a v2.
Thanks!
