Re: [Bug 189181] New: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference in mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages

["Marek Marczykowski-Górecki" <marmarek@mimuw.edu.pl>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1719 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 07:30:17PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 30-11-16 13:16:53, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:00:40PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/workingset.c b/mm/workingset.c
> > > index 617475f529f4..0f07522c5c0e 100644
> > > --- a/mm/workingset.c
> > > +++ b/mm/workingset.c
> > > @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static unsigned long count_shadow_nodes(struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > >  	shadow_nodes = list_lru_shrink_count(&workingset_shadow_nodes, sc);
> > >  	local_irq_enable();
> > >  
> > > -	if (memcg_kmem_enabled()) {
> > > +	if (memcg_kmem_enabled() && sc->memcg) {
> > >  		pages = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(sc->memcg, sc->nid,
> > >  						     LRU_ALL_FILE);
> > >  	} else {
> > 
> > If we do that, I'd remove the racy memcg_kmem_enabled() check
> > altogether and just check for whether we have a memcg or not.
> 
> But that would make this a memcg aware shrinker even when kmem is not
> enabled...
> 
> But now that I am looking into the code
> shrink_slab:
> 		if (memcg_kmem_enabled() &&
> 		    !!memcg != !!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE))
> 			continue;
> 
> this should be taken care of already. So sc->memcg should be indeed
> sufficient. So unless I am missing something I will respin my local
> patch and post it later after the reporter has some time to test the
> current one.

The above patch seems to help. At least the problem haven't occurred for
the last ~40 VM startups.

>  
> > What do you think, Vladimir?
> 

-- 
Pozdrawiam / Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki  | RLU #390519
marmarek at staszic waw pl  | xmpp:marmarek at staszic waw pl

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]