Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Nov 2018 12:01:22 -0400 | From | Sasha Levin <> | Subject | Re: Will the recent memory leak fixes be backported to longterm kernels? |
| |
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 02:45:42AM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote: >> From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> >> Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 17:58 >> >> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 12:16:02AM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote: >> Hello, Dexuan! >> >> A couple of issues has been revealed recently, here are fixes >> (hashes are from the next tree): >> >> 5f4b04528b5f mm: don't reclaim inodes with many attached pages >> 5a03b371ad6a mm: handle no memcg case in memcg_kmem_charge() >> properly >> >> These two patches should be added to the serie. > >Thanks for the new info! > >> Re stable backporting, I'd really wait for some time. Memory reclaim is a >> quite complex and fragile area, so even if patches are correct by themselves, >> they can easily cause a regression by revealing some other issues (as it was >> with the inode reclaim case). > >I totally agree. I'm now just wondering if there is any temporary workaround, >even if that means we have to run the kernel with some features disabled or >with a suboptimal performance?
I'm not sure what workload you're seeing it on, but if you could merge these 7 patches and see that it solves the problem you're seeing and doesn't cause any regressions it'll be a useful test for the rest of us.
-- Thanks, Sasha
| |