On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:58 PM Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On (24/02/23 13:56), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > On (24/02/22 20:50), Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:48 PM Sergey Senozhatsky > > > <senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On (24/02/22 18:27), Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > > > > I also don't see any recent changes in mm/zsmalloc.c that modify this > > > > > code, so maybe it wasn't introduce in 6.7. I will defer to Minchan and > > > > > Sergey, I don't think zswap is an active actor in this bug report. > > > > > > > > Yeah. [1] are the only recent zsmalloc patches I can recall, and those > > > > patches touch zsmalloc locking (zspages migration/compaction). > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240219-b4-szmalloc-migrate-v1-0-34cd49c6545b@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > These are not in 6.8.0-rc5 anyway, right? > > > > I see them in next-20240223, which seems to be 6.8-rc6 (according to > ^ -rc5 > > But they look more or less correct to me, so I'm not blaming those > patches. We should be protected by pool->look. Bisection would help > us a lot, I think. Andrew picked up those patches in mm-unstable, which is included in linux-next at some point IIUC, but the patches there don't all end up in the next rc unless I am misunderstanding something here. These patches should be headed to v6.9 AFAICT. Actually, if I am not mistaken the patches were sent *after* v.6.8-rc5 was out, and it's not common for non-fixes to make it into rc releases anyway, right?
