lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: memcg causes crashes in list_lru_add
    On Mon 29-04-19 12:40:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
    > On Mon 29-04-19 12:09:53, Jiri Slaby wrote:
    > > On 29. 04. 19, 11:25, Jiri Slaby wrote:> memcg_update_all_list_lrus
    > > should take care about resizing the array.
    > >
    > > It should, but:
    > > [ 0.058362] Number of physical nodes 2
    > > [ 0.058366] Skipping disabled node 0
    > >
    > > So this should be the real fix:
    > > --- linux-5.0-stable1.orig/mm/list_lru.c
    > > +++ linux-5.0-stable1/mm/list_lru.c
    > > @@ -37,11 +37,12 @@ static int lru_shrinker_id(struct list_l
    > >
    > > static inline bool list_lru_memcg_aware(struct list_lru *lru)
    > > {
    > > - /*
    > > - * This needs node 0 to be always present, even
    > > - * in the systems supporting sparse numa ids.
    > > - */
    > > - return !!lru->node[0].memcg_lrus;
    > > + int i;
    > > +
    > > + for_each_online_node(i)
    > > + return !!lru->node[i].memcg_lrus;
    > > +
    > > + return false;
    > > }
    > >
    > > static inline struct list_lru_one *
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Opinions?
    >
    > Please report upstream. This code here is there for quite some time.
    > I do not really remember why we do have an assumption about node 0
    > and why it hasn't been problem until now.

    Humm, I blame jet-lag. I was convinced that this is an internal email.
    Sorry about the confusion.

    Anyway, time to revisit 145949a1387ba. CCed Raghavendra.
    --
    Michal Hocko
    SUSE Labs

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-04-29 12:44    [W:4.496 / U:0.196 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site