From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/p2m: Check __brk_limit before allocating. Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:53:02 +0100 Message-ID: <1343289182.8016.38.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> References: <1343161413-11077-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1343161413-11077-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 16:23 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c b/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c > index 64effdc..b5bb26c 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c > @@ -498,7 +498,14 @@ static bool alloc_p2m(unsigned long pfn) > > return true; > } > - > +#include > +bool __init can_extend_brk() > +{ > + /* Always reserve one for the DMI extend_brk call. */ That seems a bit fragile, what if someone adds something else or the link order changes etc? Can't we just have a variant of extend_brk which returns NULL instead of BUG_ON and do error checking? Or even just change extend_brk and push the BUG_ONs out to the callers -- there aren't that many of them. Ian. -- Ian Campbell Most people in this society who aren't actively mad are, at best, reformed or potential lunatics. -- Susan Sontag