Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Jun 2014 16:04:14 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] /proc/stat vs. failed order-4 allocation |
| |
On Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:10:58 +0200 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 02:29:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:04:50 +0200 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > These two patches are supposed to "fix" failed order-4 memory > > > allocations which have been observed when reading /proc/stat. > > > The problem has been observed on s390 as well as on x86. > > > > > > To address the problem change the seq_file memory allocations to > > > fallback to use vmalloc, so that allocations also work if memory > > > is fragmented. > > > > > > This approach seems to be simpler and less intrusive than changing > > > /proc/stat to use an interator. Also it "fixes" other users as well, > > > which use seq_file's single_open() interface. > > > > Yes, those changes look pretty simple and effective. > > > > I'm unclear on how urgent these fixes are. I semi-randomly tagged them > > for 3.16 with a -stable backport, but that could be changed? > > I assume tagged for 3.16 means you intend to get it merged before 3.16 > gets released? > If so, then that would be fine with me.
um, actually, no, sorry, I meant merge for 3.17-rc1 with a -stable backport.
We can do 3.16 of course, but for what reasons?
| |