[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140618142931.857d57fe0007a361404f6cab@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:29:31 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
Hendrik Brueckner <brueckner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thorsten Diehl <thorsten.diehl@...ibm.com>,
Andrea Righi <andrea@...terlinux.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@...onical.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] /proc/stat vs. failed order-4 allocation
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:04:50 +0200 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> wrote:
> These two patches are supposed to "fix" failed order-4 memory
> allocations which have been observed when reading /proc/stat.
> The problem has been observed on s390 as well as on x86.
>
> To address the problem change the seq_file memory allocations to
> fallback to use vmalloc, so that allocations also work if memory
> is fragmented.
>
> This approach seems to be simpler and less intrusive than changing
> /proc/stat to use an interator. Also it "fixes" other users as well,
> which use seq_file's single_open() interface.
Yes, those changes look pretty simple and effective.
I'm unclear on how urgent these fixes are. I semi-randomly tagged them
for 3.16 with a -stable backport, but that could be changed?
--
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