From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760548AbdAFUlb (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:41:31 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:42028 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1032208AbdAFUlO (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:41:14 -0500 Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 12:42:33 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Thomas Garnier Cc: Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Linux-MM , LKML , John Sperbeck Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix SLAB freelist randomization duplicate entries Message-Id: <20170106124233.189364f79056513b62ebc026@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20170103181908.143178-1-thgarnie@google.com> <20170105163527.d37a29d6e7b3bfdafd7472d2@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 09:58:48 -0800 Thomas Garnier wrote: > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:19:08 -0800 Thomas Garnier wrote: > > > >> This patch fixes a bug in the freelist randomization code. When a high > >> random number is used, the freelist will contain duplicate entries. It > >> will result in different allocations sharing the same chunk. > > > > Important: what are the user-visible runtime effects of the bug? > > It will result in odd behaviours and crashes. It should be uncommon > but it depends on the machines. We saw it happening more often on some > machines (every few hours of running tests). So should the fix be backported into -stable kernels? > > > >> Fixes: c7ce4f60ac19 ("mm: SLAB freelist randomization") > >> Signed-off-by: John Sperbeck > >> Reviewed-by: Thomas Garnier > > > > This should have been signed off by yourself. > > > > I'm guessing that the author was in fact John? If so, you should > > indicate this by putting his From: line at the start of the changelog. > > Otherwise, authorship will default to the sender (ie, yourself). > > > > Sorry, I though the sign-off was enough. Do you want me to send a v2? I have the patch as From: John Sperbeck Signed-off-by: John Sperbeck Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier Is that correct? Is John the primary author?