linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" <tobin@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] slob: Respect list_head abstraction layer
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 14:59:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <63e395fc-41c5-00bf-0767-a313554f7b23@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190403211354.GC23288@eros.localdomain>

On 4/3/19 11:13 PM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:

> According to 0day test robot this is triggering an error from
> CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION when the kernel is built with CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST.

FWIW, that report [1] was for commit 15c8410c67adef from next-20190401. I've
checked and it's still the v4 version, although the report came after you
submitted v5 (it wasn't testing the patches from mailing list, but mmotm). I
don't see any report for the v5 version so I'd expect it to be indeed fixed by
the new approach that adds boolean return parameter to slob_page_alloc().

Vlastimil

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/5ca413c6.9TM84kwWw8lLhnmK%25lkp@intel.com/T/#u

> I think this is because list_rotate_to_front() puts the list into an
> invalid state before it calls __list_add().  The thing that has me
> stumped is why this was not happening before this patch series was
> applied?  ATM I'm not able to get my test module to trigger this but I'm
> going to try a bit harder today.  If I'm right one solution is to modify
> list_rotate_to_front() to _not_ call __list_add() but do it manually,
> this solution doesn't sit well with me though.
> 
> So, summing up, I think the patch is correct in that it does the correct
> thing but I think the debugging code doesn't like it because we are
> violating typical usage - so the patch is wrong :)
> 
> thanks,
> Tobin.
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-09 12:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-02 23:05 [PATCH v5 0/7] mm: Use slab_list list_head instead of lru Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] list: Add function list_rotate_to_front() Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 15:46   ` Christopher Lameter
2019-04-03 17:57   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] slob: Respect list_head abstraction layer Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 15:45   ` Christopher Lameter
2019-04-03 18:00   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-03 21:03     ` Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 21:23       ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-03 22:14         ` Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 21:13     ` Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-09 12:59       ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2019-04-09 20:06         ` Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-09 22:25           ` Andrew Morton
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] slob: Use slab_list instead of lru Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 15:47   ` Christopher Lameter
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] slub: Add comments to endif pre-processor macros Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 18:42   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] slub: Use slab_list instead of lru Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 18:43   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] slab: " Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 15:48   ` Christopher Lameter
2019-04-03 18:44   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-02 23:05 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] mm: Remove stale comment from page struct Tobin C. Harding
2019-04-03 18:45   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-09 13:07 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] mm: Use slab_list list_head instead of lru Vlastimil Babka

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=63e395fc-41c5-00bf-0767-a313554f7b23@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=me@tobin.cc \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=tobin@kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox