Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Christoph Lameter
Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 - 2:10 pm

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Eric Dumazet wrote:


Hmmm... Thats another case. We should alloate the map higher up there I
guess and pass the address in so that one allocation can be used for all
slabs. validate_slab_cache() does that.

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Eric Dumazet, (Wed Mar 24, 4:40 am)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Christoph Lameter, (Wed Mar 24, 12:16 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Eric Dumazet, (Wed Mar 24, 12:22 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Christoph Lameter, (Wed Mar 24, 12:49 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Eric Dumazet, (Wed Mar 24, 2:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Christoph Lameter, (Wed Mar 24, 2:10 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Christoph Lameter, (Wed Mar 24, 2:14 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Eric Dumazet, (Wed Mar 24, 2:25 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Christoph Lameter, (Wed Mar 24, 2:25 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Eric Dumazet, (Wed Mar 24, 2:30 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Pekka Enberg, (Thu Mar 25, 12:29 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Christoph Lameter, (Thu Mar 25, 2:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH] slub: Potential stack overflow, Pekka Enberg, (Sun Mar 28, 10:10 am)