[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200521095515.GK6462@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 11:55:15 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Cc: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
"Linux F2FS DEV, Mailing List"
<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mm: mkfs.ext4 invoked oom-killer on i386 - pagecache_get_page
On Wed 20-05-20 20:09:06, Chris Down wrote:
> Hi Naresh,
>
> Naresh Kamboju writes:
> > As a part of investigation on this issue LKFT teammate Anders Roxell
> > git bisected the problem and found bad commit(s) which caused this problem.
> >
> > The following two patches have been reverted on next-20200519 and retested the
> > reproducible steps and confirmed the test case mkfs -t ext4 got PASS.
> > ( invoked oom-killer is gone now)
> >
> > Revert "mm, memcg: avoid stale protection values when cgroup is above
> > protection"
> > This reverts commit 23a53e1c02006120f89383270d46cbd040a70bc6.
> >
> > Revert "mm, memcg: decouple e{low,min} state mutations from protection
> > checks"
> > This reverts commit 7b88906ab7399b58bb088c28befe50bcce076d82.
>
> Thanks Anders and Naresh for tracking this down and reverting.
>
> I'll take a look tomorrow. I don't see anything immediately obviously wrong
> in either of those commits from a (very) cursory glance, but they should
> only be taking effect if protections are set.
Agreed. If memory.{low,min} is not used then the patch should be
effectively a nop. Btw. do you see the problem when booting with
cgroup_disable=memory kernel command line parameter?
I suspect that something might be initialized for memcg incorrectly and
the patch just makes it more visible for some reason.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists