Re: KVM overflows the stack

[Avi Kivity]

Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 23:08 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
>   
> >  > Yes, things like kvm_lapic_state are way too big to be on the
> > stack.
> >
> > I had a quick look at the code, and my worry about dynamic allocation
> > would be that handling allocation failure seems like it might get
> > tricky.  Eg for handling struct kvm_pv_mmu_op_buffer (which is 528 bytes
> > on the stack in kvm_pv_mmu_op()) can you deal with an mmu op failing?
> >     
>
> Well, you *better* be able to deal with it.  :)
>
> This code is also doing a *ton* of copy_to/from_user().  If userspace
> had one of its input buffers swapped out (or one of its output buffers
> not faulted in yet) and we're out of memory enough to be failing
> kmallocs() then we're sure as heck also going to failing the user
> copies.
>
> I think it's a non-issue.
>
>   

Yes, it's designed to be restartable.  Returning 0 should be fine.

We can reduce the buffer size to 256 though.  I wouldn't want an 
allocation in this hot path.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/