linux-kernel - Re: Memory management issue in 4.18.15

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: <20181022150815.GA4287@tower.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
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!