From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DAFEC433E2 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:53:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CF02080C for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:53:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 24CF02080C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A64D56B0003; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A14586B0005; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:53:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 92AF46B0006; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:53:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0087.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.87]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798A76B0003 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ACB1180AD820 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:53:57 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77201179314.30.snail60_3b0874d27078 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0849A180B3AA7 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:53:57 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: snail60_3b0874d27078 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2415 Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:53:56 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: zs1d9cTR4lzqQNvlxky/OuB7KGrES3HUm6C6Ewm/uHmOHmhlYsZLF1osx4iSVael9C65sPvKk3 dhBjfbiIX0lQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9727"; a="154288555" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,365,1592895600"; d="scan'208";a="154288555" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Aug 2020 13:53:54 -0700 IronPort-SDR: /OCPrcZkRiHahOLjQ8MnMDVN9cT2EI/iOS5XT0iMuitLHFQIcMIfg4Ju0VrihGCnZq0S65Jl+S pW8RKe4vlt2g== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,365,1592895600"; d="scan'208";a="330060605" Received: from tassilo.jf.intel.com (HELO tassilo.localdomain) ([10.7.201.21]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Aug 2020 13:53:54 -0700 Received: by tassilo.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 096E3301C54; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:30:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:30:33 -0700 From: Andi Kleen To: Mike Kravetz Cc: Muchun Song , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: Fix a race between hugetlb sysctl handlers Message-ID: <20200828203033.GT1509399@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <20200828031146.43035-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com> <20200828145950.GS1509399@tassilo.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0849A180B3AA7 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:14:16AM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote: > On 8/28/20 7:59 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> Fixes: e5ff215941d5 ("hugetlb: multiple hstates for multiple page sizes") > > > > I believe the Fixes line is still not correct. The original patch > > didn't have that problem. Please identify which patch added > > the problematic code. > > Hi Andi, > > I agree with Muchun's assessment that the issue was caused by e5ff215941d5. > Why? Yes when checking the code again I agree. It was introduced with that patch. Patches look ok to me now. -Andi