Re: [PATCH 0/6][resend] mempolicy memory corruption fixlet

Josh Boyer
2012-08-15T11:40:49Z

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:32 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On 7/31/2012 8:33 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:17 AM, <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> This is trivial fixes of mempolicy meory corruption issues. There
>>> are independent patches each ather. and, they don't change userland
>>> ABIs.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> changes from v1: fix some typo of changelogs s.
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>> KOSAKI Motohiro (6):
>>> Revert "mm: mempolicy: Let vma_merge and vma_split handle
>>> vma->vm_policy linkages"
>>> mempolicy: Kill all mempolicy sharing
>>> mempolicy: fix a race in shared_policy_replace()
>>> mempolicy: fix refcount leak in mpol_set_shared_policy()
>>> mempolicy: fix a memory corruption by refcount imbalance in
>>> alloc_pages_vma()
>>> MAINTAINERS: Added MEMPOLICY entry
>>>
>>> MAINTAINERS | 7 +++
>>> mm/mempolicy.c | 151 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>> mm/shmem.c | 9 ++--
>>> 3 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>>
>> I don't see these patches queued anywhere. They aren't in linux-next,
>> mmotm, or Linus' tree. Did these get dropped? Is the revert still
>> needed?
>
> Sorry. my fault. yes, it is needed. currently, Some LTP was fail since
> Mel's "mm: mempolicy: Let vma_merge and vma_split handle vma->vm_policy linkages" patch.

The series still isn't queued anywhere. Are you planning on resending
it again, or should it get picked up in a particular tree?

josh