[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140418182444.GB22235@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 20:24:44 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Chiang <pchiang@...dia.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"ccross@...roid.com" <ccross@...roid.com>,
"lizefan@...wei.com" <lizefan@...wei.com>,
"tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>, "pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>,
"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"guillaume@...infr.org" <guillaume@...infr.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] memcg: mm_update_next_owner() should skip kthreads
On Fri 18-04-14 19:26:31, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/18, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. I seem to see a bug in this function, it can be fulled by use_mm,
> > but I am not sure this can explain the problem. I'll send a patch.
>
> Untested, please review. But it really looks "obviously wrong", and note
> that unuse_mm() doesn't do mm_update_next_owner(). (just in case, do not
> confuse it with unuse_mm() in mm/swapfile.c).
Both patches seem to be correct but I am missinng why they are marked as
memcg: when they are touching generic mm_update_next_owner path.
Anyway, feel free to add
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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