On (06/03/16 12:05), Michal Hocko wrote: > > > RIP collect_mm_slot() + 0x42/0x84 > > > khugepaged > > > > So is this really collect_mm_slot called directly from khugepaged or is > > some inlining going on there? inlining I suppose. > > > prepare_to_wait_event > > > maybe_pmd_mkwrite > > > kthread > > > _raw_sin_unlock_irq > > > ret_from_fork > > > kthread_create_on_node > > > > > > collect_mm_slot() + 0x42/0x84 is > > > > I guess that the problem is that I have missed that __khugepaged_exit > > doesn't clear the cached khugepaged_scan.mm_slot. Does the following on > > top fixes that? > > That wouldn't be sufficient after a closer look. We need to do the same > from khugepaged_scan_mm_slot when atomic_inc_not_zero fails. So I guess > it would be better to stick it into collect_mm_slot. Michal, I'll try to test during the weekend (away from the affected box now), but in the worst case it can as late as next Thursday (gonna travel next week). -ss -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>