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  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]
Date:   Mon, 18 Feb 2019 14:34:52 -0500
From:   Sasha Levin <>
To:     Rik van Riel <>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,,,
        Dave Chinner <>,
        Wolfgang Walter <>, Roman Gushchin <>,
        Spock <>, Michal Hocko <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Linus Torvalds <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.20 71/92] Revert "mm: slowly shrink slabs with a
 relatively small number of objects"

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:30:44AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
>On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 14:43 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> 4.20-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let
>> me know.
>> ------------------
>> From: Dave Chinner <>
>> commit a9a238e83fbb0df31c3b9b67003f8f9d1d1b6c96 upstream.
>> This reverts commit 172b06c32b9497 ("mm: slowly shrink slabs with a
>> relatively small number of objects").
>This revert will result in the slab caches of dead
>cgroups with a small number of remaining objects never
>getting reclaimed, which can be a memory leak in some

What's the "right" choice though? we get either leaky cgroups or hanging

>But hey, that's your tradeoff to make.

I don't think that any decision was made here, the stable tree simply
follows upstream with regards to fixes and bugs such as these: we remain
"bug compatible" with upstream in these scenarios, there was no decision
made to prefer either bug.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists