On 4/4/24 9:07 AM, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> When seq_* code sees that its buffer overflowed, it re-allocates a bigger
> onecand calls seq_operations->start() callback again.
> stack_start() naively though that if it got called again, it meant that the
> old record got already printed so it returned the next object, but that is
> not true.
>
> The consequence of that is that every time stack_stop() -> stack_start()
> get called because we needed a bigger buffer, stack_start() will skip
> entries, and those will not be printed.
>
> Fix it by not advancing to the next object in stack_start().
>
> Fixes: 765973a09803 ("mm,page_owner: display all stacks and their count")
> Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/page_owner.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_owner.c b/mm/page_owner.c
> index b4476f45b376..9bef0b442863 100644
> --- a/mm/page_owner.c
> +++ b/mm/page_owner.c
> @@ -872,13 +872,11 @@ static void *stack_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
> * value of stack_list.
> */
> stack = smp_load_acquire(&stack_list);
> + m->private = stack;
> } else {
> stack = m->private;
> - stack = stack->next;
> }
>
> - m->private = stack;
> -
> return stack;
> }
>
