On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 23:30, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Alok Kataria wrote:
>
> > As pointed by Christoph, In kmalloc_node we are cheking if, the allocation is
> > for the
> > same node when interrupts are "on", this may lead to an allocation on another
> > node than intended.
> > This patch just shifts the check for the current node in __cache_alloc_node
> > when interrupts
> > are disabled.
>
> Alokk, could you verify that this patch works?
Yes it does work at my end, i am still not able to reproduce the BUG so
don't know if we really fix that BUG.
>
> Petr, could you check that this patch fixes your issue? I am a bit
> skeptical. I do not think we have found the real problem yet. We need to
> have some way to reproduce the problem if it still persists after applying
> Alokk's patch.
Yep, that will help, if it still BUG's the information that you provided with verify_entry will be great.
Thanks & Regards,
Alok
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |