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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 9 Sep 2020 20:10:38 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Cc:     zangchunxin@...edance.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] mm/vmscan: fix infinite loop in drop_slab_node

On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 5:59 PM Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name> wrote:
>
> Muchun Song writes:
> >1. Double the threshold currently hard coded as "10" with each iteration
> >    suggested by Vlastimil. It is also a good idea.
>
> I think this sounds reasonable, although I'd like to see what the difference in
> reclaim looks like in practice.
>
> >2. In the while loop, we can check whether the TASK_KILLABLE
> >    signal is set, if so, we should break the loop. like the following code
> >    snippe. Thanks.
> >
> >@@ -704,6 +704,9 @@ void drop_slab_node(int nid)
> >  do {
> >  struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
> >
> >+ if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> >+ return;
> >+
> >  freed = 0;
> >  memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL);
> >  do {
>
> Regardless of anything, I think this is probably a good idea. Could you send it
> as a patch? :-)

OK, Will do that thanks.

>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris



-- 
Yours,
Muchun

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ