From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: net/sctp: vmalloc allocation failure in
 sctp_setsockopt/xt_alloc_table_info
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 16:18:03 -0200
Message-ID: <20161128181803.GA13159@localhost.localdomain>
References: <CAAeHK+wecw6ST_DWJQBLFNwVsOVgderGE-EEJiN0-kf796XHtw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161128141340.GA29839@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <CAAeHK+xJmwF6hddS-sO-y3HQkRicwQN=ZceFWTZT2M_0h4E2hQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161128143931.GB29839@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <20161128151312.GA13172@localhost.localdomain>
 <20161128174647.GC29839@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <20161128174710.GE28510@breakpoint.cc>
 <20161128175626.GD29839@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <20161128180925.GF28510@breakpoint.cc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
To: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Return-path: <netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48486 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752857AbcK1SSG (ORCPT <rfc822;netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:18:06 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161128180925.GF28510@breakpoint.cc>
Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 07:09:25PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> 
> [ trimming CCs ]
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 06:47:10PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> > > > I'm not sure I agree with that.  Generally speaking it seems like the right
> > > > thing to do, if you want to avoid filling logs with warnings, but this is the
> > > > sort of error that is going to be accompanied by severe service interruption.
> > > > I'd rather see a reason behind that in the logs, than just have it occur
> > > > silently.
> > > 
> > > Its not silent -- the setsockopt call will fail and userspace should
> > > display an error.
> > > 
> > Thats not true.  If the OOM succedes in freeing enough memory to fulfill the
> > request the setsockopt may complete without error, you're just left with a
> > killed process...somewhere.  Thats seems a bit dodgy to me
> 

__GFP_NOWARN is about allocation failures only and it won't disable OOM
kill messages.  oom_kill_process() has no idea on GFP_NOWARN when doing
the logging.

> We should prevent OOM killer from running in first place (GFP_NORETRY should work).

Oh. Really?