[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100618111735.b3d64d95.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:17:35 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH -mm] fix bad call of memcg_oom_recover at cancel
move.
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:57:41 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> > May I recommend the following change instead
> >
> >
> > Don't crash on a null memcg being passed, check if memcg
> > is NULL and handle the condition gracefully
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index c6ece0a..d71c488 100644
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -1370,7 +1370,7 @@ static void memcg_wakeup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *mem)
> >
> > static void memcg_oom_recover(struct mem_cgroup *mem)
> > {
> > - if (mem->oom_kill_disable && atomic_read(&mem->oom_lock))
> > + if (mem && mem->oom_kill_disable && atomic_read(&mem->oom_lock))
> > memcg_wakeup_oom(mem);
> > }
> >
> I agree to this fix.
>
> Acked-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
>
I tend to dislike band-aid in callee. but it's not important here.
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists