From: "Magnus Groß" <magnus.gross@rwth-aachen.de>
To: <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <anthony.yznaga@oracle.com>,
<glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<matoro_bugzilla_kernel@matoro.tk>,
<matoro_mailinglist_kernel@matoro.tk>,
<regressions@leemhuis.info>, <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
<viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: regression: Bug 215601 - gcc segv at startup on ia64
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 11:46:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yhyn9cjDV8XfXLHm@fractal.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202202260344.63C15C3356@keescook>
> When the kernel tries to map these with a combined allocation, it asks
> for a giant mmap of the file, but the file is, of course, not at all
> that large, and the mapping is rejected.
> So... I'm trying to think about how best to deal with this. If I or
> anyone else can't think of an elegant solution, I'll send a revert for
> the offending patch next week.
Shouldn't we just be able to patch total_mapping_size() again to instead
sum up all p_memsz fields, instead of comparing minimum and maximum
p_vaddr?
Runtime complexity would be the same as we are iterating through all
segments already anyway. And I would also argue that is the behaviour
that one wanted to see in that function anyway.
If you agree with this, I can post a patch, but I would need to know
what tree to base it on to avoid merge conflicts with the just merged
patch from Alexey.
--
Magnus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-28 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-20 17:12 regression: Bug 215601 - gcc segv at startup on ia64 Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-02-20 17:19 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-02-21 7:42 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-21 19:49 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2022-02-21 20:58 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-21 21:57 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2022-02-24 3:58 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-24 5:16 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-24 9:33 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2022-02-24 14:22 ` matoro
2022-02-24 16:33 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-26 11:52 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-28 10:46 ` Magnus Groß [this message]
2022-02-28 20:41 ` Kees Cook
2022-03-02 12:01 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2022-03-02 12:35 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
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=Yhyn9cjDV8XfXLHm@fractal.localdomain \
--to=magnus.gross@rwth-aachen.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anthony.yznaga@oracle.com \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matoro_bugzilla_kernel@matoro.tk \
--cc=matoro_mailinglist_kernel@matoro.tk \
--cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).