From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757920AbeD0KUZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2018 06:20:25 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:44768 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757609AbeD0KUX (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2018 06:20:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 06:20:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikulas Patocka X-X-Sender: mpatocka@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com To: Michal Hocko cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , John Stoffel , James Bottomley , Michal@stoffel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jasowang@redhat.com, Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox , linux-mm@kvack.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, Vlastimil Babka , Andrew@stoffel.org, David Rientjes , Morton , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, David Miller , edumazet@google.com Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v5] fault-injection: introduce kvmalloc fallback options In-Reply-To: <20180427082555.GC17484@dhcp22.suse.cz> Message-ID: References: <1524694663.4100.21.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1524697697.4100.23.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <23266.8532.619051.784274@quad.stoffel.home> <20180427005213-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180427082555.GC17484@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 26-04-18 18:52:05, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > [...] > > > But assuming it's important to control this kind of > > > fault injection to be controlled from > > > a dedicated menuconfig option, why not the rest of > > > faults? > > > > The injected faults cause damage to the user, so there's no point to > > enable them by default. vmalloc fallback should not cause any damage > > (assuming that the code is correctly written). > > But you want to find those bugs which would BUG_ON easier, so there is a > risk of harm IIUC Yes, I want to harm them, but I only want to harm the users using the debugging kernel. Testers should be "harmed" by crashes - so that the users of production kernels are harmed less. If someone hits this, he should report it, use the kernel parameter to turn it off and continue with the testing. > and this is not much different than other fault injecting paths. Fault injections causes misbehavior even on completely bug-free code (for example, syscalls randomly returning -ENOMEM). This won't cause misbehavior on bug-free code. Mikulas