From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 33502] New: Caught 64-bit read from uninitialized memory in __alloc_skb Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:03:26 +0200 Message-ID: <1305021806.2614.17.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <20110418153852.153d3ed3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1303181466.4152.39.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303182557.4152.48.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303183217.4152.49.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303244270.2756.3.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4DAE7579.3020400@cs.helsinki.fi> <1303279470.2756.17.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303285519.4dae8f0fdf9b1@imp.free.fr> <4DAE901C.2090809@cs.helsinki.fi> <1303286998.3186.18.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303290464.3186.32.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303293765.3186.74.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303309591.3186.84.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1303311687.3186.100.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1305016988.2614.6.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4DC909BD.5080903@cs.helsinki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Christoph Lameter , casteyde.christian@free.fr, Andrew Morton , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, Vegard Nossum To: Pekka Enberg Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:34925 "EHLO mail-ww0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752666Ab1EJKDb (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 May 2011 06:03:31 -0400 Received: by wwk4 with SMTP id 4so3209080wwk.1 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 03:03:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DC909BD.5080903@cs.helsinki.fi> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le mardi 10 mai 2011 =C3=A0 12:47 +0300, Pekka Enberg a =C3=A9crit : > On 5/10/11 11:43 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > I am trying to follow things but honestly I am lost. > > Isnt commit 1759415e63 planned for 2.6.40 ? > > ( ref : > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=3Dlinux/kernel/git/penberg/slab-2.6.git;a=3D= commitdiff;h=3D1759415e630e5db0dd2390df9f94892cbfb9a8a2 ) >=20 > Yes, it's for 2.6.40. >=20 > > How shall we fix things for 2.6.39 ? I thought my patch was OK for = that. > > >=20 > It's so late in the release cycle that I think the best option is to = fix=20 > it in 2.6.40 and backport it to -stable together with the above commi= t. >=20 > > Its a bit hard to work with you on this stuff, for a report I made = ages > > ago, I find it incredible its not yet fixed in linux-2.6. >=20 > It's not incredible, I simply managed to miss your patch. Sorry about= that. >=20 Pekka, my word was probably too strong, sorry for that. What I meant is I dont understand how Christoph expect to solve this problem if irqsafe_cpu_cmpxchg_double() is used everywhere.