netdev - Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: only manage socket pressure for CONFIG

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20151209142836.e81260567879110f319c01a4@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:28:36 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: only manage socket pressure for
 CONFIG_INET

On Wed, 9 Dec 2015 13:58:58 -0500 Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:

> > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index 6faea81e66d7..73cd572167bb 100644
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -4220,13 +4220,13 @@ mem_cgroup_css_online(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css)
> >  	if (ret)
> >  		return ret;
> >  
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_INET
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_LEGACY_KMEM
> >  	ret = tcp_init_cgroup(memcg);
> >  	if (ret)
> >  		return ret;
> >  #endif
> 
> The calls to tcp_init_cgroup() appear earlier in the series than "mm:
> memcontrol: hook up vmpressure to socket pressure". However, they get
> moved around a few times so fixing it earlier means respinning the
> series. Andrew, it's up to you whether we take the bisectability hit
> for !CONFIG_INET && CONFIG_MEMCG (how common is this?) or whether you
> want me to resend the series.

hm, drat, I was suspecting dependency issues here, but a test build
said it was OK.

Actually, I was expecting this patch series to depend on the linux-next
cgroup2 changes, but that doesn't appear to be the case.  *should* this
series be staged after the cgroup2 code?

Regarding this particular series: yes, I think we can live with a
bisection hole for !CONFIG_INET && CONFIG_MEMCG users.  But I'm not
sure why we're discussing bisection issues, because Arnd's build
failure occurs with everything applied?

> Sorry about the trouble. I don't have a git tree on kernel.org because
> we don't really use git in -mm, but the downside is that we don't get
> the benefits of the automatic build testing for all kinds of configs.
> I'll try to set up a git tree to expose series to full build coverage
> before they hit -mm and -next.

This sort of thing happens quite rarely.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html