archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <>
To: Eric Dumazet <>
Cc: LKML <>, Eric Dumazet <>
Subject: Re: dozens of sysbot reports
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 15:20:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:44 PM Eric Dumazet <> wrote:
> I have a pile of (still under triage) sysbot reports coming after one of your patch
> Typical stack trace:
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 24889 at mm/util.c:597 kvmalloc_node+0x111/0x120 mm/util.c:597
> Call Trace:
>  hash_ipport_create+0x3dd/0x1220 net/netfilter/ipset/ip_set_hash_gen.h:1524
>  ip_set_create+0x782/0x15a0 net/netfilter/ipset/ip_set_core.c:1100
>  nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0xbc9/0x13f0 net/netfilter/nfnetlink.c:296

So the real question is mainly just whether those huge allocations
actually make sense or not.

If they truly are sensible, we can remove the warning. But it would be
good to perhaps look at them more.

Because no:

> Do we want to fix all problematic callers, with ad-hoc patches like

Not insane patches like this, no.

>  ip_set_alloc(size_t size)
>  {
> +       if (size > INT_MAX)
> +               return NULL;
>         return kvzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
>  }

But does that kind of size really make sense? I'm looking at the
particular caller, is it *really* senseible to have a 4GB+ hash table

IOW, I don't think we want that warning to cause the above kinds of
ad-hoc patches.

But I _do_ want that warning to make people go "is that allocation
truly sensible"?

IOW, it sounds like you can send some netlink message that causes
insane hash size allocations. Shouldn't _that_ be fixed?


  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-03 22:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-03 20:44 dozens of sysbot reports Eric Dumazet
2021-09-03 22:20 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-09-03 23:00   ` Eric Dumazet
2021-09-03 23:08     ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-03 23:11       ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-07 10:18   ` David Laight

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='' \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).