From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, rientjes@google.com, cl@linux.com,
penberg@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [STABLE PATCH] slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:06:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5BADE115.7020701@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180927154647.GB31654@kroah.com>
On 2018/9/27 23:46, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:43:40PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
>> From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
>>
>> /*
>> * cpu_partial determined the maximum number of objects
>> * kept in the per cpu partial lists of a processor.
>> */
>>
>> Can't be negative.
>>
>> I hit a real issue that it will result in a large number of memory leak.
>> Because Freeing slabs are in interrupt context. So it can trigger this issue.
>> put_cpu_partial can be interrupted more than once.
>> due to a union struct of lru and pobjects in struct page, when other core handles
>> page->lru list, for eaxmple, remove_partial in freeing slab code flow, It will
>> result in pobjects being a negative value(0xdead0000). Therefore, a large number
>> of slabs will be added to per_cpu partial list.
>>
>> I had posted the issue to community before. The detailed issue description is as follows.
>>
>> Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2870979.html
>>
>> After applying the patch, The issue is fixed. So the patch is a effective bugfix.
>> It should go into stable.
> <formletter>
>
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree. Please read:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> for how to do this properly.
>
> </formletter>
Will resend with proper format.
Thanks,
zhong jiang
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, <rientjes@google.com>, <cl@linux.com>,
<penberg@kernel.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<mhocko@suse.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [STABLE PATCH] slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:06:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5BADE115.7020701@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180927154647.GB31654@kroah.com>
On 2018/9/27 23:46, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:43:40PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
>> From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
>>
>> /*
>> * cpu_partial determined the maximum number of objects
>> * kept in the per cpu partial lists of a processor.
>> */
>>
>> Can't be negative.
>>
>> I hit a real issue that it will result in a large number of memory leak.
>> Because Freeing slabs are in interrupt context. So it can trigger this issue.
>> put_cpu_partial can be interrupted more than once.
>> due to a union struct of lru and pobjects in struct page, when other core handles
>> page->lru list, for eaxmple, remove_partial in freeing slab code flow, It will
>> result in pobjects being a negative value(0xdead0000). Therefore, a large number
>> of slabs will be added to per_cpu partial list.
>>
>> I had posted the issue to community before. The detailed issue description is as follows.
>>
>> Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2870979.html
>>
>> After applying the patch, The issue is fixed. So the patch is a effective bugfix.
>> It should go into stable.
> <formletter>
>
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree. Please read:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> for how to do this properly.
>
> </formletter>
Will resend with proper format.
Thanks,
zhong jiang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-28 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-27 14:43 [STABLE PATCH] slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int zhong jiang
2018-09-27 14:43 ` zhong jiang
2018-09-27 15:26 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-09-27 15:46 ` Greg KH
2018-09-28 8:06 ` zhong jiang [this message]
2018-09-28 8:06 ` zhong jiang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-09-30 10:28 zhong jiang
2018-09-30 10:28 ` zhong jiang
2018-09-30 12:37 ` Greg KH
2018-09-30 12:50 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-30 13:10 ` Greg KH
2018-09-30 13:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-10-02 14:50 ` Christopher Lameter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5BADE115.7020701@huawei.com \
--to=zhongjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=gregkh@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.