Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1342370 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] Add support for usbfs zerocopy.

Started by"Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@google.com>
First post2016-02-24 20:40 +0100
Last post2016-02-24 20:40 +0100
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH] Add support for usbfs zerocopy. "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@google.com> - 2016-02-24 20:40 +0100

#1342370 — Re: [PATCH] Add support for usbfs zerocopy.

From"Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@google.com>
Date2016-02-24 20:40 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Add support for usbfs zerocopy.
Message-ID<r5NrX-Ia-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:30:08PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> I'm seeing the following warning while fuzzing:
> [ 1595.188189] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 26063 at mm/page_alloc.c:3207 __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x960/0x29e0()
> [ 1595.188287] Modules linked in:
> [ 1595.188316] CPU: 3 PID: 26063 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted 4.5.0-rc5-next-20160223-sasha-00022-g03b30f1-dirty #2982

I think it was already established that one could cause kernel warnings if
trying to allocate large amounts of memory, but that the usbfs memory limits
could curb truly dangerous amounts. Someone please correct me if I'm
misunderstanding?

/* Steinar */
-- 
Software Engineer, Google Switzerland

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web