David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2015 10:50:07 -0800
>
> > I do not feel we should go back to kmalloc() just because
> > vmalloc_array() does not exist yet.
>
> Agreed.
>
Please change as you like.
I was thinking to introduce a helper that does vmalloc() when
kmall
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2015 10:50:07 -0800
> I do not feel we should go back to kmalloc() just because
> vmalloc_array() does not exist yet.
Agreed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More major
On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 00:50 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Commit 095dc8e0c3686d58 ("tcp: fix/cleanup inet_ehash_locks_alloc()")
> silently changed from kmalloc() to kmalloc_array(). The latter has
> overflow check whereas the former doesn't have.
>
> If nblocks * locksz might overflow, we need to d
From: Tetsuo Handa
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 00:58:50 +0900
> Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> Commit 095dc8e0c3686d58 ("tcp: fix/cleanup inet_ehash_locks_alloc()")
>> silently changed from kmalloc() to kmalloc_array(). The latter has
>> overflow check whereas the former doesn't have.
>>
>> If nblocks * locks
Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Commit 095dc8e0c3686d58 ("tcp: fix/cleanup inet_ehash_locks_alloc()")
> silently changed from kmalloc() to kmalloc_array(). The latter has
> overflow check whereas the former doesn't have.
>
> If nblocks * locksz might overflow, we need to do like
>
> - if (!hashinfo->eha
Commit 095dc8e0c3686d58 ("tcp: fix/cleanup inet_ehash_locks_alloc()")
silently changed from kmalloc() to kmalloc_array(). The latter has
overflow check whereas the former doesn't have.
If nblocks * locksz might overflow, we need to do like
- if (!hashinfo->ehash_locks && nblocks > SIZE_MAX / l
