lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: frequent lockups in 3.18rc4
From
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> Should we at least check to see if it is present?
>
> if (!(pgd_entry & 1))
> return -1;

Maybe. But what other entry could there be?

But yes, returning -1 is "safe", since it basically says "I'm not
doing a vmalloc thing, oops if this is a bad access". So that kind of
argues for being as aggressive as possible in returning 1.

So for the first one (!pgd_entry), instead of returning -1 only for a
completely empty entry, returning it for any non-present case is
probably right.

And for the second one (where we check whether there is anything at
all in the destination), returning -1 for "anything but zero" is
probably the right thing to do.

But in the end, if you have a corrupted top-level kernel page table,
it sounds to me like you're just royally screwed anyway. So I don't
think it matters *that* much.

So I kind of agree, but it wouldn't be my primary worry. My primary
worry is actually paravirt doing something insane.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-21 21:01    [W:0.913 / U:1.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site