[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20201009155055.f87de51ea04d4ea879e3981a@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 15:50:55 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
Cc: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcg: fix device private memcg accounting
On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 14:59:52 -0700 Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com> wrote:
> The code in mc_handle_swap_pte() checks for non_swap_entry() and returns
> NULL before checking is_device_private_entry() so device private pages
> are never handled.
> Fix this by checking for non_swap_entry() after handling device private
> swap PTEs.
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
I was going to ask "what are the end-user visible effects of the bug".
This is important information with a cc:stable.
>
> I'm not sure exactly how to test this. I ran the HMM self tests but
> that is a minimal sanity check. I think moving the self test from one
> memory cgroup to another while it is running would exercise this patch.
> I'm looking at how the test could move itself to another group after
> migrating some anonymous memory to the test driver.
>
But this makes me suspect the answer is "there aren't any that we know
of". Are you sure a cc:stable is warranted?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists