[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401202155410.21729@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 21:58:28 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartmann <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs
access to memory reserves
On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > This is concerning because it's merged in -mm without being tested by Eric
> > and is marked for stable while violating the stable kernel rules criteria.
>
> Are you questioning the patch fixes the described issue?
>
> Please note that the exit_robust_list and PF_EXITING as a culprit has
> been identified by Eric. Of course I would prefer if it was tested by
> anybody who can reproduce it.
You're saying the patch hasn't been tested by anybody and that clearly
violates the first rule in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt:
- It must be obviously correct and tested.
Adding Greg to the cc if this should be clarified further. The patches
getting proposed through -mm for stable boggles my mind sometimes.
--
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