lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: WARNING in sk_stream_kill_queues (5)
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 19:01, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/3/20 6:41 PM, Marco Elver wrote:
>
> > One more experiment -- simply adding
> >
> > --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > @@ -207,7 +207,21 @@ struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > */
> > size = SKB_DATA_ALIGN(size);
> > size += SKB_DATA_ALIGN(sizeof(struct skb_shared_info));
> > + size = 1 << kmalloc_index(size); /* HACK */
> > data = kmalloc_reserve(size, gfp_mask, node, &pfmemalloc);
> >
> >
> > also got rid of the warnings. Something must be off with some value that
> > is computed in terms of ksize(). If not, I don't have any explanation
> > for why the above hides the problem.
>
> Maybe the implementations of various macros (SKB_DATA_ALIGN and friends)
> hae some kind of assumptions, I will double check this.

If I force kfence to return 4K sized allocations for everything, the
warnings remain. That might suggest that it's not due to a missed
ALIGN.

Is it possible that copies or moves are a problem? E.g. we copy
something from kfence -> non-kfence object (or vice-versa), and
ksize() no longer matches, then things go wrong?

Thanks,
-- Marco

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-08 21:20    [W:0.117 / U:1.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site