From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:03:30 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: build error: sparsemem + SLOB In-Reply-To: <20061119210545.9708e366.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Message-ID: References: <20061119210545.9708e366.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Randy Dunlap Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, mpm@selenic.com, Pekka Enberg List-ID: On Sun, 19 Nov 2006, Randy Dunlap wrote: > mm/sparse.c: line 35 uses slab_is_available() but SLAB=n, SLOB=y. I wonder if its worth bothering about SLOB? As far as I can tell SLOB is fundamentally racy since it does not support SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU correctly. F.e. The constructor for the anon_vma will be called on alloc without regard for RCU, we free an item and reuse it without regard to RCU. This can potentially mess up the anon_vma locking state while we access it. Is SLOB used at all or have we been lucky so far? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org