On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 10:59:16PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Hit divide-by-0 in vmpressure_work_fn(): checking vmpr->scanned before
> taking the lock is not enough, we must check scanned afterwards too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hu...@google.com>
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org

Hm... Just trying to understand this one. I don't see how this can happen,
considering that only one instance of vmpressure_work_fn() supposed to be
running (unlike vmpressure()), and the only place where we zero
vmpr->scanned is vmpressure_work_fn() itself?

> ---
> 
>  mm/vmpressure.c |    3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> --- 3.11/mm/vmpressure.c      2013-09-02 13:46:10.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux/mm/vmpressure.c     2013-09-06 22:43:03.596003080 -0700
> @@ -187,6 +187,9 @@ static void vmpressure_work_fn(struct wo
>       vmpr->reclaimed = 0;
>       spin_unlock(&vmpr->sr_lock);
>  
> +     if (!scanned)
> +             return;
> +
>       do {
>               if (vmpressure_event(vmpr, scanned, reclaimed))
>                       break;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to