lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CA+G9fYvDXiZ9E9EfU6h0gsJ+xaXY77mRu9Jg+J7C=X4gJ3qvLg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 21:47:00 +0530 From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com> Cc: Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>, Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>, "Linux F2FS DEV, Mailing List" <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: mm: mkfs.ext4 invoked oom-killer on i386 - pagecache_get_page On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 20:33, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote: > > On Fri 22-05-20 02:23:09, Naresh Kamboju wrote: > > My apology ! > > As per the test results history this problem started happening from > > Bad : next-20200430 (still reproducible on next-20200519) > > Good : next-20200429 > > > > The git tree / tag used for testing is from linux next-20200430 tag and reverted > > following three patches and oom-killer problem fixed. > > > > Revert "mm, memcg: avoid stale protection values when cgroup is above > > protection" > > Revert "mm, memcg: decouple e{low,min} state mutations from protectinn checks" > > Revert "mm-memcg-decouple-elowmin-state-mutations-from-protection-checks-fix" > > The discussion has fragmented and I got lost TBH. > In http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+G9fYuDWGZx50UpD+WcsDeHX9vi3hpksvBAWbMgRZadb0Pkww@mail.gmail.com > you have said that none of the added tracing output has triggered. Does > this still hold? Because I still have a hard time to understand how > those three patches could have the observed effects. On the other email thread [1] this issue is concluded. Yafang wrote on May 22 2020, Regarding the root cause, my guess is it makes a similar mistake that I tried to fix in the previous patch that the direct reclaimer read a stale protection value. But I don't think it is worth to add another fix. The best way is to revert this commit. [1] [PATCH v3 2/2] mm, memcg: Decouple e{low,min} state mutations from protection checks https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CALOAHbArZ3NsuR3mCnx_kbSF8ktpjhUF2kaaTa7Mb7ocJajsQg@mail.gmail.com/ - Naresh > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists