linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:41:33 +0900
From:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To:	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Sudhir Kumar <skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@...inux.co.jp>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>, riel@...hat.com,
	"kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches

> >   1. please fix current bugs on hierarchy management, before new feature.
> >      AFAIK, OOM-Kill under hierarchy is broken. (I have patches but waits for
> >      merge window close.)
> 
> I've not hit the OOM-kill issue under hierarchy so far, is the OOM
> killer selecting a bad task to kill? I'll debug/reproduce the issue.
> I am not posting these patches for inclusion, fixing bugs is
> definitely the highest priority.
> 
I agree.

Just FYI, I have several bug fix patches for current memcg(that is for .29).
I've been testing them now, and it survives my test(rmdir aftre task move
under memory pressure and page migration) w/o big problem(except oom) for hours
in both use_hierarchy==0/1 case.

> >      I wonder there will be some others. Lockdep error which Nishimura reported
> >      are all fixed now ?
> 
> I run all my kernels and tests with lockdep enabled, I did not see any
> lockdep errors showing up.
> 
I think Paul's hierarchy_mutex patches fixed the dead lock, I haven't seen
the dead lock after the patch.
(Although, it may cause another dead lock when other subsystems are added.)


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/