[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240417211836.2742593-1-peterx@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:18:33 -0400
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: peterx@...hat.com,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] mm/hugetlb: Fix missing hugetlb_lock for memcg resv uncharge
Should fix the recent syzbot report for:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/000000000000ee06de0616177560@google.com/
Patch 1 is a small fixup where I notice mm-unstable crashes with the new
hugetlb memcg accounting when testing the changes.
Patch 2 should be the fix to the reported issue.
Patch 3 is an oneliner to add an assertion similar to what found the issue
in patch 2.
Only smoke tested over a bunch of hugetlb unit tests. Reviews welcomed.
Thanks,
Peter Xu (3):
fixup! mm: always initialise folio->_deferred_list
mm/hugetlb: Fix missing hugetlb_lock for resv uncharge
mm/hugetlb: Assert hugetlb_lock in __hugetlb_cgroup_commit_charge
mm/hugetlb.c | 5 ++++-
mm/hugetlb_cgroup.c | 2 +-
mm/memcontrol.c | 1 +
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
2.44.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists