Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,page_alloc: PF_WQ_WORKER threads must sleep at
 should_reclaim_retry().
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <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>
 <6f433d59-4a56-b698-e119-682bb8bf6713@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
 <20180731050928.GA4557@dhcp22.suse.cz>
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <d11c3aa2-0f14-d882-59c5-6634dc56eed1@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 07:05:54 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180731050928.GA4557@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2018/07/31 14:09, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 31-07-18 06:01:48, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> is this an {Acked,Reviewed,Tested}-by?
> 
> I will send the patch to Andrew if the patch is ok. 
> 
>> (And that change will conflict with Roman's cgroup aware OOM killer patchset. But it
>> should be easy to rebase.)
> 
> That is still a WIP so I would lose sleep over it.
> 

Now that Roman's cgroup aware OOM killer patchset will be dropped from linux-next.git ,
linux-next.git will get the sleeping point removed. Please send this patch to linux-next.git .