[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210914190951.2e44de6a55a0c7004d5381b3@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 19:09:51 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
Cc: <david@...hat.com>, <jhubbard@...dia.com>, <vbabka@...e.cz>,
<iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/page_isolation: guard against possible putback
unisolated page
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 19:45:08 +0800 Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com> wrote:
> Isolating a free page in an isolated pageblock is expected to always work
> as watermarks don't apply here. But if __isolate_free_page() failed, due
> to condition changes, the page will be left on the free list. And the page
> will be put back to free list again via __putback_isolated_page(). This may
> trigger VM_BUG_ON_PAGE() on page->flags checking in __free_one_page() if
> PageReported is set. Or we will corrupt the free list because list_add()
> will be called for pages already on another list. Add a VM_WARN_ON() to
> complain about this change.
Are you able to identify a Fixes: here?
Is a cc:stable justified?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists