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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 15:08:22 +0000 From: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> CC: Spock <dairinin@...il.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, "Johannes Weiner" <hannes@...xchg.org>, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org> Subject: Re: Memory management issue in 4.18.15 On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:33:22AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > Cc som more people. > > I am wondering why 172b06c32b94 ("mm: slowly shrink slabs with a > relatively small number of objects") has been backported to the stable > tree when not marked that way. Put that aside it seems likely that the > upstream kernel will have the same issue I suspect. Roman, could you > have a look please? Sure, already looking... Spock provided some useful details, and I think, I know what's happening... Hope to propose a solution soon. RE backporting: I'm slightly surprised that only one patch of the memcg reclaim fix series has been backported. Either all or none makes much more sense to me. Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists