linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.18] Revert "mm: slowly shrink slabs with a relatively small number of objects"

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20181026111859.23807-1-sashal@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 26 Oct 2018 07:18:59 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.18] Revert "mm: slowly shrink slabs with a relatively small number of objects"

This reverts commit 62aad93f09c1952ede86405894df1b22012fd5ab.

Which was upstream commit 172b06c32b94 ("mm: slowly shrink slabs with a
relatively small number of objects").

The upstream commit was found to cause regressions. While there is a
proposed fix upstream, revent this patch from stable trees for now as
testing the fix will take some time.

Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 11 -----------
 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index fc0436407471..03822f86f288 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -386,17 +386,6 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
 	delta = freeable >> priority;
 	delta *= 4;
 	do_div(delta, shrinker->seeks);
-
-	/*
-	 * Make sure we apply some minimal pressure on default priority
-	 * even on small cgroups. Stale objects are not only consuming memory
-	 * by themselves, but can also hold a reference to a dying cgroup,
-	 * preventing it from being reclaimed. A dying cgroup with all
-	 * corresponding structures like per-cpu stats and kmem caches
-	 * can be really big, so it may lead to a significant waste of memory.
-	 */
-	delta = max_t(unsigned long long, delta, min(freeable, batch_size));
-
 	total_scan += delta;
 	if (total_scan < 0) {
 		pr_err("shrink_slab: %pF negative objects to delete nr=%ld\n",
-- 
2.17.1