Re: [syzbot] [crypto?] general protection fault in scatterwalk_copychunks (5)

[Nhat Pham]

On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 3:10 AM Barry Song <21cnbao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 5:16 PM Chengming Zhou
> <zhouchengming@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your explanation! Maybe it's best for us to return to 2 pages
> > if no other people's comments. And this really need more documentation :-)

Fine by me. Hmm we're basically wasting one extra page per CPU (since
these buffers are per-CPU), correct? That's not ideal, but not *too*
bad for now I suppose...

>
> I agree. we need some doc.
>
> besides, i actually think we can skip zswap frontend if
> over-compression is really
> happening.

IIUC, zsmalloc already checked that - and most people are (or should
be) using zsmalloc for zswap anyway. I wouldn't be opposed to adding
an added layer of protection on the zswap side, but not super high
priority I'd say.