[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+G9fYvw+oY-EK1+FYCUAD5-UGD4MhBGJHasjF+L5nLtzL2GLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 21:11:53 +0530
From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
To: Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Cc: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm, memcg: Decouple e{low,min} state mutations
from protection checks
On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 17:15, Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name> wrote:
>
> Naresh Kamboju writes:
> >This patch is causing oom-killer while running mkfs -t ext4 on i386 kernel
> >running on x86_64 machine version linux-next 5.7.0-rc6-next-20200521.
>
> I think I see what's wrong here -- if we bail out early, memory.e{min,low}
> might be uninitialised.
>
> Does this patch fix it, by any chance?
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index d3b23c57bed4..aa902b9cbb79 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -5046,6 +5046,9 @@ mem_cgroup_css_alloc(struct cgroup_subsys_state *parent_css)
> memory_cgrp_subsys.broken_hierarchy = true;
> }
>
> + memcg->memory.emin = 0;
> + memcg->memory.elow = 0;
> +
> /* The following stuff does not apply to the root */
> if (!parent) {
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
This patch did not fix the problem.
The test log showing oom-killer link,
https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1445128#L1194
Build images:
https://builds.tuxbuild.com/YqW37GVsCHf8ndxOT2z1iQ/
- Naresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists