On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 12:21:10PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Dave Jones wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:24:32PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > > > On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Dave Jones wrote: > > > > > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/mutex.c:269 > > > > > > Hmm, looks like we need to change the refcount semantics entirely. We'll > > > need to make get_vma_policy() always take a reference and then drop it > > > accordingly. This work sif get_vma_policy() can grab a reference while > > > holding task_lock() for the task policy fallback case. > > > > > > Comments on this approach? > > > > Seems to be surviving my testing at least.. > > > > Sounds good. Is it possible to verify that policy_cache isn't getting > larger than normal in /proc/slabinfo, i.e. when all processes with a > task mempolicy or shared vma policy have exited, are there still a > significant number of active objects? Killing the fuzzer caused it to drop dramatically. Before: (15:29:59:davej@bitcrush:trinity[master])$ sudo cat /proc/slabinfo | grep policy shared_policy_node 2931 2967 376 43 4 : tunables 0 0 0 : slabdata 69 69 0 numa_policy 2971 6545 464 35 4 : tunables 0 0 0 : slabdata 187 187 0 After: (15:30:16:davej@bitcrush:trinity[master])$ sudo cat /proc/slabinfo | grep policy shared_policy_node 0 215 376 43 4 : tunables 0 0 0 : slabdata 5 5 0 numa_policy 15 175 464 35 4 : tunables 0 0 0 : slabdata 5 5 0 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>