linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH]vmscan: handle underflow for get_scan

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: <1269930756.17240.4.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:32:36 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]vmscan: handle underflow for get_scan_ratio

On Tue, 2010-03-30 at 14:08 +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Hi
> 
> > Commit 84b18490d1f1bc7ed5095c929f78bc002eb70f26 introduces a regression.
> > With it, our tmpfs test always oom. The test has a lot of rotated anon
> > pages and cause percent[0] zero. Actually the percent[0] is a very small
> > value, but our calculation round it to zero. The commit makes vmscan
> > completely skip anon pages and cause oops.
> > An option is if percent[x] is zero in get_scan_ratio(), forces it
> > to 1. See below patch.
> > But the offending commit still changes behavior. Without the commit, we scan
> > all pages if priority is zero, below patch doesn't fix this. Don't know if
> > It's required to fix this too.
> 
> Can you please post your /proc/meminfo 
attached.
> and reproduce program? I'll digg it.
our test is quite sample. mount tmpfs with double memory size and store several
copies (memory size * 2/G) of kernel in tmpfs, and then do kernel build.
for example, there is 3G memory and then tmpfs size is 6G and there is 6
kernel copy.
> Very unfortunately, this patch isn't acceptable. In past time, vmscan 
> had similar logic, but 1% swap-out made lots bug reports. 
can you elaborate this?
Completely restore previous behavior (do full scan with priority 0) is
ok too.

View attachment "meminfo" of type "text/plain" (1115 bytes)