[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140122220910.198121ee.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 22:09:10 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>, gnome@...t.net,
drawoc@...krefraction.com, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug 67651] Bisected: Lots of fragmented mmaps cause gimp to
fail in 3.12 after exceeding vm_max_map_count
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 09:59:06 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 02:45:53PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > >
> > > Thus when user space application track memory changes now it can detect if
> > > vma area is renewed.
> >
> > Presumably some path is failing to set VM_SOFTDIRTY, thus preventing mms
> > from being merged.
> >
> > That being said, this could cause vma blowups for programs that are
> > actually using this thing.
>
> Hi Andy, indeed, this could happen. The easiest way is to ignore softdirty bit
> when we're trying to merge vmas and set it one new merged. I think this should
> be correct. Once I finish I'll send the patch.
Hang on. We think the problem is that gimp is generating vmas which
*should* be merged, but for unknown reasons they differ in
VM_SOFTDIRTY, yes?
Shouldn't we work out where we're forgetting to set VM_SOFTDIRTY?
Putting bandaids over this error when we come to trying to merge the
vmas sounds very wrong?
--
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