Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm, memcg: Decouple e{low,min} state mutations from protection checks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 12:07 AM Chris Down <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Chris Down writes:
> >Yafang Shao writes:
> >>I will do it.
> >>If no one has objection to my proposal, I will send it tomorrow.
> >
> >If the fixup patch works, just send that. Otherwise, sure.
>
> Oh, I see the other reply from Naresh now saying it didn't help.
>
> Sure, feel free to do that for now then while we work out what the real problem
> is.

Regarding the root cause, my guess is it makes a similar mistake that
I tried to fix in the previous patch that the direct reclaimer read a
stale protection value.  But I don't think it is worth to add another
fix. The best way is to revert this commit.

-- 
Thanks
Yafang




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux