From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f72.google.com (mail-oi0-f72.google.com [209.85.218.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7796B0005 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:02:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-f72.google.com with SMTP id m197-v6so11852334oig.18 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www262.sakura.ne.jp (www262.sakura.ne.jp. [202.181.97.72]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q206-v6si9535244oic.413.2018.07.30.14.02.13 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,page_alloc: PF_WQ_WORKER threads must sleep at should_reclaim_retry(). References: <20180726113958.GE28386@dhcp22.suse.cz> <55c9da7f-e448-964a-5b50-47f89a24235b@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20180730093257.GG24267@dhcp22.suse.cz> <9158a23e-7793-7735-e35c-acd540ca59bf@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20180730144647.GX24267@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180730145425.GE1206094@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> <0018ac3b-94ee-5f09-e4e0-df53d2cbc925@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20180730154424.GG1206094@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> <20180730185110.GB24267@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180730191005.GC24267@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Tetsuo Handa Message-ID: <6f433d59-4a56-b698-e119-682bb8bf6713@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 06:01:48 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180730191005.GC24267@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko , Tejun Heo Cc: Roman Gushchin , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , David Rientjes , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-mm , LKML On 2018/07/31 4:10, Michal Hocko wrote: > Since should_reclaim_retry() should be a natural reschedule point, > let's do the short sleep for PF_WQ_WORKER threads unconditionally in > order to guarantee that other pending work items are started. This will > workaround this problem and it is less fragile than hunting down when > the sleep is missed. E.g. we used to have a sleeping point in the oom > path but this has been removed recently because it caused other issues. > Having a single sleeping point is more robust. linux.git has not removed the sleeping point in the OOM path yet. Since removing the sleeping point in the OOM path can mitigate CVE-2016-10723, please do so immediately. (And that change will conflict with Roman's cgroup aware OOM killer patchset. But it should be easy to rebase.)