Re: [PATCH 1/2] tmpfs mempolicy: fix /proc/mounts corruptingmemory
From: Hugh Dickins
Date: Wed Jan 02 2013 - 13:48:33 EST
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >> @@ -2796,10 +2787,7 @@ int mpol_to_str(char *buffer, int maxlen
> >> case MPOL_BIND:
> >> /* Fall through */
> >> case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
> >> - if (no_context)
> >> - nodes = pol->w.user_nodemask;
> >> - else
> >> - nodes = pol->v.nodes;
> >> + nodes = pol->v.nodes;
> >> break;
> > no_context was always true. Why is the code from the false branch kept?
> no_context is zero in the caller in fs/proc/task_mmu.c, and one in the
> mm/shmem.c caller. So it's not always true (for mpol_parse_str() there
> is only one caller, and it's always true as Hugh said).
Yes, I think Christoph was remembering the old days when mpol_to_str()
started out just for tmpfs; later /proc/pid/numa_maps extended it for
use on vmas (the "contextualized" !no_context case).
> Anyway, I do not know why Hugh took the true case, but I don't really
> imagine that it matters. So I'll take these two patches, but it would
> be good if you double-checked this, Hugh.
Thanks, yes, I played with a number of ways of fixing it (and sat on my
original fix for several days, rightly guessing this an area where more
problems would emerge - only later realizing mpol=prefer:Node wrong too).
I could probably have kept mpol_to_str()'s no_context arg, and done
something with it in the MPOL_PREFERRED case; perhaps would have chosen
that if the arg had been more understandably named than "no_context";
but in the end thought removing the need for the arg was simplest.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/