linux-kernel - Re: OOM: Better, but still there on

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 21 Dec 2016 09:04:14 -0500
From:   Chris Mason <clm@...com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
CC:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        <nholland@...ys.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <dsterba@...e.cz>,
        <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: OOM: Better, but still there on

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:16:53PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Wed 21-12-16 20:00:38, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>
>One thing to note here, when we are talking about 32b kernel, things
>have changed in 4.8 when we moved from the zone based to node based
>reclaim (see b2e18757f2c9 ("mm, vmscan: begin reclaiming pages on a
>per-node basis") and associated patches). It is possible that the
>reporter is hitting some pathological path which needs fixing but it
>might be also related to something else. So I am rather not trying to
>blame 32b yet...

It might be interesting to put tracing on releasepage and see if btrfs 
is pinning pages around.  I can't see how 32bit kernels would be 
different, but maybe we're hitting a weird corner.

-chris