[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20191029175459.b3bfed9326559e69acdd2e35@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 17:54:59 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+13f93c99c06988391efe@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: vmscan: memcontrol: remove
mem_cgroup_select_victim_node()
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 16:47:53 -0700 Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> wrote:
> Since commit 1ba6fc9af35b ("mm: vmscan: do not share cgroup iteration
> between reclaimers"), the memcg reclaim does not bail out earlier based
> on sc->nr_reclaimed and will traverse all the nodes. All the reclaimable
> pages of the memcg on all the nodes will be scanned relative to the
> reclaim priority. So, there is no need to maintain state regarding which
> node to start the memcg reclaim from. Also KCSAN complains data races in
> the code maintaining the state.
>
> This patch effectively reverts the commit 889976dbcb12 ("memcg: reclaim
> memory from nodes in round-robin order") and the commit 453a9bf347f1
> ("memcg: fix numa scan information update to be triggered by memory
> event").
>
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> Reported-by: <syzbot+13f93c99c06988391efe@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
I can't find the original sysbot email. Help?
iirc the incidentally-fixed issue is a rather theoretical data race and
the patch isn't a high priority thing?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists