linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Candidate fix for increased number of GFP

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]

Message-ID: <20091023211239.GA6185@bizet.domek.prywatny>
Date:	Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:12:39 +0200
From:	Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@...il.com>
To:	Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@...il.com>
Cc:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Sven Geggus <lists@...hsschwanzdomain.de>,
	Tobias Oetiker <tobi@...iker.ch>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
	Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@....fi>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mohamed Abbas <mohamed.abbas@...el.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@...net.com>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Candidate fix for increased number of GFP_ATOMIC
	failures V2

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 06:58:10PM +0200, Karol Lewandowski wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:22:31PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > Test 3: If you are getting allocation failures, try with the following patch
> > 
> >   3/5 vmscan: Force kswapd to take notice faster when high-order watermarks are being hit

> No, problem doesn't go away with these patches (1+2+3).  However, from
> my testing this particular patch makes it way, way harder to trigger
> allocation failures (but these are still present).
> 
> This bothers me - should I test following patches with or without
> above patch?  This patch makes bug harder to find, IMVHO it doesn't
> fix the real problem.
..

> Test 4: If you are still getting failures, apply the following
>  4/5 page allocator: Pre-emptively wake kswapd when high-order watermarks are hit

Ok, I've tested patches 1+2+4 and bug, while very hard to trigger, is
still present. I'll test complete 1-4 patchset as time permits.

Thanks.
--
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/