From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
libhugetlbfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
William Lee Irwin <wli@holomorphy.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [powerpc] Fix bogus BUG_ON() in in hugetlb_get_unmapped_area()
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 19:51:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <EE6A12AA-3BE6-43DE-AEB2-7477CDAD21DC@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061222011706.GA27396@localhost.localdomain>
>>> + if (len > TASK_SIZE)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> Shouldn't that be addr+len instead? The check looks incomplete
>> otherwise. And you meant ">=" I guess?
>
> No. Have a look at the other hugetlb_get_unmapped_area()
> implementations. Because this is in the get_unmapped_area() path,
> 'addr' is just a hint,
Ah I missed this vital piece of information, thanks for the
explanation. Care putting in a code comment pointing this out?
> so checking addr+len would give bogus
> failures. This test is, I believe, essentially an optimization - if
> it fails, we're never going to find a suitable addr, so we might as
> well give up now.
Yes, it all makes sense now.
>>> - /* Paranoia, caller should have dealt with this */
>>> - BUG_ON((addr + len) > 0x100000000UL);
>>> -
>>
>> Any real reason to remove the paranoia check? If it's trivially
>> always satisfied, the compiler will get rid of it for you :-)
>
> Yes - this is the very bug on which was causing crashes - the "caller
> should have dealt with this" comment is wrong. The test has been
> moved into htlb_check_hinted_area() and now simply fails (and so falls
> back to searching for a suitable address), rather than BUG()ing.
Yep.
Cheers,
Segher
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-22 18:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-21 22:23 [powerpc] Fix bogus BUG_ON() in in hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() David Gibson
2006-12-22 0:31 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-12-22 1:17 ` David Gibson
2006-12-22 18:51 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
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=EE6A12AA-3BE6-43DE-AEB2-7477CDAD21DC@kernel.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=libhugetlbfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.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