lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: do not recurse in direct reclaim
On Tue 25-10-16 11:01:42, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 04:45:44PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 25-10-16 10:10:50, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > Like other direct reclaimers, mark tasks in memcg reclaim PF_MEMALLOC
> > > to avoid recursing into any other form of direct reclaim. Then let
> > > recursive charges from PF_MEMALLOC contexts bypass the cgroup limit.
> >
> > Should we mark this for stable (up to 4.5) which changed the out-out to
> > opt-in?
>
> Yes, good point.
>
> Internally, we're pulling it into our 4.6 tree as well. The commit
> that fixes the particular bug we encountered in btrfs is a9bb7e620efd
> ("memcg: only account kmem allocations marked as __GFP_ACCOUNT") in
> 4.5+, so you could argue that we don't need the backport in kernels
> with this commit. And I'm not aware of other manifestations of this
> problem. But the unbounded recursion hole is still there, technically,
> so we might just want to put it into all stable kernels and be safe.
>
> So either
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # up to and including 4.5

As the patch was released in 4.5 it shouldn't be needed in 4.5 stable
tree but

> or, and I'm leaning toward that, simply
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>

this sounds less confusing I guess.

--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-25 17:08    [W:0.064 / U:0.936 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site