On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 01:17:02PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
>On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 21:54 +0800, WANG Cong wrote:
>> Since sparse_index_alloc() can return NULL on memory allocation failure,
>> we must deal with the failure condition when calling it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
>> index e06f514..d245e59 100644
>> --- a/mm/sparse.c
>> +++ b/mm/sparse.c
>> @@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ static int __meminit sparse_index_init(unsigned long section_nr, int nid)
>> return -EEXIST;
>>
>> section = sparse_index_alloc(nid);
>> + if (!section)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> /*
>> * This lock keeps two different sections from
>> * reallocating for the same index
>
>Oddly enough, sparse_add_one_section() doesn't seem to like to check
>its allocations. The usemap is checked, but not freed on error. If you
>want to fix this up, I think it needs a little more love than just two
>lines.
Er, right. I missed this point.
>
>Do you want to try to add some actual error handling to
>sparse_add_one_section()?
Yes, I will have a try. And memory_present() also doesn't check it.
More patches around this will come up soon. Since Andrew has included
the above patch, so I won't remake it with others together.
Andrew, is this OK for you?
Thanks.
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
