On Mon, 21 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Mon, 21 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > > Yes, sounded the same to me too: I couldn't reproduce it or see anything > > > wrong in the code back then. But Srihari's info about CONFIG_DEBUG_SLUB > > > off has helped a lot: I was then able to reproduce it on my x86_64, and > > > after a lot of staring at the code, the problem became obvious... > > > > Right. The #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is at the wrong location. The best fix > > is to moving the #ifdef otherwise the size is still wrong for the > > ctor case. > > ? My patch did handle the ctor case.
True. I was thinking about just checking the problem case that we had here. > > SLUB Debug: Fix object size calculation > > > > The object size calculation is wrong if !CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG because > > the #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is now switching off the size adjustments > > for DESTROY_BY_RCU and ctor. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Yes, I think that should do it too. The reason behind my repeating > the block was to handle the case where SLAB_POISON is passed to > kmem_cache_create, but CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is off. But apparently > that case would hit the BUG_ON(flags & ~CREATE_MASK), therefore > your patch is simpler and better. Quite a maze. Would you ack my patch? I do not want to repeat the block. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
