From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1VMSWS-0002XG-Le for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:55:10 +0000 Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E963EE1A3 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:54:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 159E645DE58 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:54:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id F154245DE3E for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:54:37 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D741DB8049 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:54:37 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.134]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B766E08004 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:54:37 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <523A4B11.6010409@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:53:37 +0900 From: HATAYAMA Daisuke MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] cache: fix cache logic not go into invalid state References: <20130917062606.4671.40617.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6> In-Reply-To: <20130917062606.4671.40617.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=twosheds.infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: kumagai-atsushi@mxc.nes.nec.co.jp Cc: ptesarik@suse.cz, kexec@lists.infradead.org Hello Kumagai-san, Could you review these patches? (2013/09/17 15:29), HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote: > I faced failure of sadump phys_base calculation and found a bug in > cache.c causes it. Due to the bug, cache_alloc() returns NULL forever > throughout execution. The fix is the 2nd patch. During the > investigation I also found a lack of malloc() allocation failure > check. The fix is the 1st patch. Primary is the 2nd one. > > I built this patch set on top of devel branch. > > --- > > HATAYAMA Daisuke (2): > cache: allocate buffers at initialization to detect malloc() failure > cache: reuse entry in pending list > > > cache.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > cache.h | 1 + > makedumpfile.c | 3 +++ > 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > -- Thanks. HATAYAMA, Daisuke _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec