On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:42:29AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 09-03-21 12:18:28, Roman Gushchin wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 11:39:41AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 12:04 AM Vasily Averin <vvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > in_interrupt() check in memcg_kmem_bypass() is incorrect because > > > > it does not allow to account memory allocation called from task context > > > > with disabled BH, i.e. inside spin_lock_bh()/spin_unlock_bh() sections > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vasily Averin <vvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > In that file in_interrupt() is used at other places too. Should we > > > change those too? > > > > Yes, it seems so. Let me prepare a fix (it seems like most of them were > > introduced by me). > > Does this affect any existing in-tree users? I'll double check this, but I doubt. We should fix it anyway, but I don't think we need any stable backports.
