Am 14.11.2013 08:33, schrieb Chen Gang: > On 11/14/2013 02:48 PM, Chen Gang wrote: >>> >From the look of it, if an error did occur in init_stub_pte(), >>>> then the special mapping of STUB_CODE and STUB_DATA would not >>>> be installed, so this area would be invisible to munmap and exit, >>>> and with your patch then the pages allocated likely to be leaked. >>>> >> It sounds reasonable to me: "although 'pgd' related with 'mm', but they >> are not installed". But just like you said originally: "better get ACK >> from some mm guys". >> >> >> Hmm... is it another issue: "after STUB_CODE succeeds, but STUB_DATA >> fails, the STUB_CODE will be leaked". >> >> >>>> Which is not to say that the existing code is actually correct: >>>> you're probably right that it's technically wrong. But it would >>>> be very hard to get init_stub_pte() to fail, and has anyone >>>> reported a problem with it? My guess is not, and my own >>>> inclination to dabble here is zero. >>>> >> Yeah. >> > > If we can not get ACK from any mm guys, and we have no enough time > resource to read related source code, for me, I still recommend to > remove p?d_free() in failure processing.
It's rather easy, does your commit fix a real problem you are facing? If the answer is "yes" we can talk. Chen, If you really want to help us, please investigate into existing/real problems. Toralf does a very good job in finding strange issues using trinity. You could help him resolving the issue described in that thread: "[uml-devel] fuzz tested 32 bit user mode linux image hangs in radix_tree_next_chunk()" Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
