Hello?

2023年4月18日 10:45，Zheng Zengkai zhengzengkai@huawei.com 写道：

在 2023/4/17 21:12, Kefeng Wang 写道:

...

• Zengkai

Could you merge this patch?

+zhangjialin

Hi Kefeng and Kang Chen

Is this patch same as the one in PR #582(https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/pulls/582) ?

I modify some necessary header files to pass the ci build.. In general, it is the same patch.

If so，let's tracking it via the gitee PR,

Ok, I will refine the pr info later.

Here are some notices about contribution to openEuler kernel:

https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/issues/I6WKLA

It looks like there is no step to send a patch to the mailing list, is it necessary? Or we can communicate in the pr comment section?

By the way, the format checker throws a WARNING `` (Reference: .*)+ <------miss Reference ``` How to fill in these patches without upstream reference?

Thank you!

...

On 2023/4/17 19:13, Kang Chen wrote:

...

hulk inclusion

I’m not sure about this header, I just follow the previous commit message on this file. Do you have a better opinion?

...

...

category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/I6NYW4 CVE: NA

---

raw call flow:

oom_kill_process -> mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(.., .., message) -> memcg_print_bad_task(message, ..)

message is "const char*" type, and incorrectly cast to "oom_control*" type in memcg_print_bad_task.

a blank line,

...

Fix it by moving memcg_print_bad_task out of mem_cgroup_scan_tasks and call it in select_bad_process and dump_tasks. Furthermore, use struct oom_control* directly and remove the useless parm `ret`.

Reviewed-by: Kefeng Wang wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com

...

Signed-off-by: Kang Chen void0red@hust.edu.cn

v3 -> v2: use type `struct oom_control *` directly and fix bugs v2 -> v1: remove parm `ret` and create a memcg_print_bad_task stub

mm/memcontrol.c | 16 +++++++++------- mm/oom_kill.c | 14 ++++++++------ 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c index 635cb8b65b86..6b4f70d090d6 100644 --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -1214,9 +1214,6 @@ int mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, break; } } -#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_QOS

• memcg_print_bad_task(arg, ret);

-#endif return ret; } @@ -4004,14 +4001,12 @@ bool memcg_low_priority_scan_tasks(int (*fn)(struct task_struct *, void *), return oc->chosen ? true : false; } -void memcg_print_bad_task(void *arg, int ret) +void memcg_print_bad_task(struct oom_control *oc) {

• struct oom_control *oc = arg;

• if (!static_branch_likely(&memcg_qos_stat_key))
      return;
  

  • if (!ret && oc->chosen) {

• if (oc->chosen) { struct mem_cgroup *memcg; memcg = mem_cgroup_from_task(oc->chosen);

@@ -4042,6 +4037,13 @@ int sysctl_memcg_qos_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, return ret; }

+#else

+void memcg_print_bad_task(struct oom_control *oc) +{ +}

• #endif #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c index 0f77eb4c6644..9d595265bbf5 100644 --- a/mm/oom_kill.c +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c @@ -408,9 +408,10 @@ static void select_bad_process(struct oom_control *oc) { oc->chosen_points = LONG_MIN;

• if (is_memcg_oom(oc))

•    mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, oom_evaluate_task, oc);
  

• else {

• if (is_memcg_oom(oc)) {

•    if (!mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, oom_evaluate_task, oc))
  

•        memcg_print_bad_task(oc);
  

• } else { struct task_struct *p; #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_QOS

@@ -473,9 +474,10 @@ static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc) pr_info("Tasks state (memory values in pages):\n"); pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj name\n");

• if (is_memcg_oom(oc))

•    mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, dump_task, oc);
  

• else {

• if (is_memcg_oom(oc)) {

•    if (!mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, dump_task, oc))
  

•        memcg_print_bad_task(oc);
  

• } else { struct task_struct *p; rcu_read_lock();

.

---

Kernel mailing list -- kernel@openeuler.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@openeuler.org