[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <917270d5-8755-b0d6-60c4-871f8c7ff982@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 15:43:22 +0800
From: Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@...el.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: lkp@...org, 0day robot <lkp@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [mm, oom] 6209f6fc62: general_protection_fault:#[##]
On 09/25/2018 03:31 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 25-09-18 15:00:15, Rong Chen wrote:
>>
>> On 09/25/2018 02:06 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Tue 25-09-18 13:48:20, kernel test robot wrote:
>>>> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
>>>>
>>>> commit: 6209f6fc62835d84c2a92d237588a114e39436ce ("mm, oom: rework mmap_exit vs. oom_reaper synchronization")
>>>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux UPDATE-20180911-024633/Tetsuo-Handa/mm-oom-Fix-unnecessary-killing-of-additional-processes/20180910-163452
>>> Do you have a msg-id to the patch that has been tested?
>> message_id: 20180910125513.311-2-mhocko@...nel.org
> Thanks! It woudl be really great if this was a part of the report when
> testing patches which are not mainline yet.
>
> This patch resulting in a crash is quite surprising. The patch is RFC
> and not tested yet but I will definitely have a look. Could you help me
> some more and give faddr2line __oom_reap_task_mm+0x40 please?
$ faddr2line ./vmlinux __oom_reap_task_mm+0x40
__oom_reap_task_mm+0x40/0x175:
can_madv_dontneed_vma at mm/internal.h:48
(inlined by) __oom_reap_task_mm at mm/oom_kill.c:505
Best Regards,
Rong Chen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists