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;
Date:   Thu, 27 Sep 2018 17:46:47 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linux-foundation.org>
To:     zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
Cc:     iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, rientjes@google.com, cl@linux.com,
        penberg@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [STABLE PATCH] slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int
Message-ID: <20180927154647.GB31654@kroah.com>
References: <1538059420-14439-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1538059420-14439-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:43:40PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
> From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
> 
>         /*
>          * cpu_partial determined the maximum number of objects
>          * kept in the per cpu partial lists of a processor.
>          */
> 
> Can't be negative.
> 
> I hit a real issue that it will result in a large number of memory leak.
> Because Freeing slabs are in interrupt context. So it can trigger this issue.
> put_cpu_partial can be interrupted more than once.
> due to a union struct of lru and pobjects in struct page, when other core handles
> page->lru list, for eaxmple, remove_partial in freeing slab code flow, It will
> result in pobjects being a negative value(0xdead0000). Therefore, a large number
> of slabs will be added to per_cpu partial list.
> 
> I had posted the issue to community before. The detailed issue description is as follows.
> 
> Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2870979.html
> 
> After applying the patch, The issue is fixed. So the patch is a effective bugfix.
> It should go into stable.

<formletter>

This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
stable kernel tree.  Please read:
    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
for how to do this properly.

</formletter>