(adding Johannes)
duoming@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
>> > --- a/lib/kobject.c
>> > +++ b/lib/kobject.c
>> > @@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ int kobject_set_name_vargs(struct kobject *kobj, const char *fmt,
>> > if (kobj->name && !fmt)
>> > return 0;
>> >
>> > - s = kvasprintf_const(GFP_KERNEL, fmt, vargs);
>> > + s = kvasprintf_const(GFP_ATOMIC, fmt, vargs);
>> > if (!s)
>> > return -ENOMEM;
>> >
>> > @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ int kobject_set_name_vargs(struct kobject *kobj, const char *fmt,
>> > if (strchr(s, '/')) {
>> > char *t;
>> >
>> > - t = kstrdup(s, GFP_KERNEL);
>> > + t = kstrdup(s, GFP_ATOMIC);
>> > kfree_const(s);
>> > if (!t)
>> > return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> Please no, you are hurting the whole kernel because of one odd user.
>> Please do not make these calls under atomic context.
>
> Thanks for your time and suggestions. I will remove the gfp_t
> parameter of dev_coredumpv in order to show it could not be used in
> atomic context.
In a way it would be nice to be able to call dev_coredump from atomic
contexts, though I don't know how practical it actually is. Is there any
other option? What about adding a gfp_t parameter to dev_set_name()? Or
is there an alternative for dev_set_name() which can be called in atomic
contexts?
Johannes&Greg, any ideas?
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
