From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah.khan@hp.com>,
js1304@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, shuahkhan@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH TRIVIAL] mm: Fix build warning in kmem_cache_create()
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 10:28:31 -0500 (CDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1207251024260.32678@router.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <500CF782.4060407@parallels.com>
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >> worth including unconditionally. Furthermore, the size related checks
> >> certainly make sense and I don't see any harm in having them as well.
> >
> > There is a WARN_ON() there and then it returns NULL!!! Crazy. Causes a
> > NULL pointer dereference later in the caller?
> >
>
> It obviously depends on the caller.
This is a violation of the calling convention to say the least. This means
if you have SLAB_PANIC set and accidentally set the name to NULL the
function will return despite the error and not panic!
> Although most of the calls to kmem_cache_create are made from static
> data, we can't assume that. Of course whoever is using static data
> should do those very same tests from the outside to be safe, but in case
> they do not, this seems to fall in the category of things that make
> debugging easier - even if we later on get to a NULL pointer dereference.
>
> Your mentioned bias towards minimum code size, however, is totally
> valid, IMHO. But I doubt those checks would introduce a huge footprint.
> I would imagine you being much more concerned about being able to wipe
> out entire subsystems like memcg, which will give you a lot more.
They are useless checks since any use of the name will also cause a NULL
pointer dereference. Same is true for interrupt checks. Checks like that
indicate a deterioration of the code base. People are afraid that
something goes wrong because they no longer understand the code so they
build a embroidery around it instead of relying on the already existing
checks at vital places. The embroidery can be useful for debugging thats
why I left it in for the CONFIG_DEBUG_VM but certainly should not be
included in production kernels.
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-25 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-13 23:12 Shuah Khan
2012-07-14 9:18 ` David Rientjes
2012-07-14 12:01 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-07-16 3:04 ` Shuah Khan
2012-07-16 9:58 ` David Rientjes
2012-07-16 14:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-07-16 15:56 ` Shuah Khan
2012-07-16 19:58 ` David Rientjes
2012-07-16 20:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-07-16 23:48 ` David Rientjes
2012-07-17 14:36 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-07-17 14:46 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-07-17 15:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-07-23 7:04 ` Glauber Costa
2012-07-25 15:28 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2012-07-17 16:52 ` Shuah Khan
2012-07-30 10:18 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-07-30 19:56 ` David Rientjes
2012-07-30 20:41 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-07-31 2:07 ` David Rientjes
2012-07-31 6:05 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-08-06 3:41 ` Shuah Khan
2012-08-06 15:14 ` [PATCH RESEND] mm: Restructure kmem_cache_create() to move debug cache integrity checks into a new function Shuah Khan
2012-08-06 16:49 ` JoonSoo Kim
2012-08-06 17:03 ` Shuah Khan
2012-08-06 21:13 ` [PATCH v2] " Shuah Khan
2012-08-09 14:06 ` Shuah Khan
2012-08-09 14:13 ` Christoph Lameter (Open Source)
2012-08-09 17:01 ` Shuah Khan
2012-08-09 19:08 ` Christoph Lameter (Open Source)
2012-08-09 19:33 ` Shuah Khan
2012-08-12 16:40 ` [PATCH v3] " Shuah Khan
2012-08-12 17:36 ` Christoph
2012-08-15 23:53 ` Andrew Morton
2012-08-16 6:40 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-08-08 14:14 ` [PATCH RESEND] " Christoph Lameter (Open Source)
2012-08-08 15:13 ` Shuah Khan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.00.1207251024260.32678@router.home \
--to=cl@linux.com \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=js1304@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shuah.khan@hp.com \
--cc=shuahkhan@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox