Hi Andrew,
Can you add this hotfix to d866f3b594ce3324947fef017bbbec1f4eb237ea on
linux-next? This was reported after you picked up the patch line.
Can probably be squashed, wasn't worth a full version.
~Gregory
---
weighted interleave presently checks (!node) when it should check
(!il_weight). This causes a wrong distribution of memory.
Reported-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/mempolicy.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index ed0d5d2d456a..ba0b2b81bd08 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1885,7 +1885,7 @@ static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
/* to prevent miscount use tsk->mems_allowed_seq to detect rebind */
cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
node = current->il_prev;
- if (!node || !node_isset(node, policy->nodes)) {
+ if (!current->il_weight || !node_isset(node, policy->nodes)) {
node = next_node_in(node, policy->nodes);
if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
goto retry;
--
2.39.1
