linux-kernel - RE: Revert c5ad33184354260be6d05de57e46a5498692f6d6 "mm/swap.c: flush lru pvecs on compound page arrival" from stable tree? Was:[osstest-admin@...project.org: [Xen-devel] [linux-4.1 bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-qemut-rhel6hvm-amd]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <D6EDEBF1F91015459DB866AC4EE162CC02414C7D@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:48:03 +0000
From:	"Odzioba, Lukasz" <lukasz.odzioba@...el.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com" <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	"david.vrabel@...rix.com" <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: RE: Revert c5ad33184354260be6d05de57e46a5498692f6d6 "mm/swap.c:
 flush lru pvecs on compound page arrival" from stable tree?
 Was:[osstest-admin@...project.org: [Xen-devel] [linux-4.1 bisection]
 complete test-amd64-i386-qemut-rhel6hvm-amd]

On Monday, July 18, 2016 5:31 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> We found that your patch in the automated Xen test-case ends up
> OOMing the box when trying to install guests. This worked prior
> to your patch.
>
> See serial log:
> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/97597/test-amd64-i386-qemut-rhel6hvm-amd/serial-pinot0.log
>
> Would it be OK to revert this patch from the stable trees?

I think it is ok to revert that, but the source of a problem may be somewhere else.
Is it the only problem with this patch, you see?
By stable trees do you mean just 4.1 or all stable trees?

Thanks,
Lukas