linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: do not loop on too_many

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <201707061948.ICJ18763.tVFOQFOHMJFSLO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date:   Thu, 6 Jul 2017 19:48:51 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:     mhocko@...nel.org
Cc:     hannes@...xchg.org, riel@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mgorman@...e.de, vbabka@...e.cz, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: do not loop on too_many_isolated for ever

Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 01-07-17 20:43:56, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > It is really hard to pursue this half solution when there is no clear
> > > indication it helps in your testing. So could you try to test with only
> > > this patch on top of the current linux-next tree (or Linus tree) and see
> > > if you can reproduce the problem?
> > 
> > With this patch on top of next-20170630, I no longer hit this problem.
> > (Of course, this is because this patch eliminates the infinite loop.)
> 
> I assume you haven't seen other negative side effects, like unexpected
> OOMs etc... Are you willing to give your Tested-by?

I didn't see other negative side effects.

Tested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>

We need long time for testing this patch at linux-next.git (and I give up
this handy bug for finding other bugs under almost OOM situation).