Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/page_owner: fix possible access violation

2015-07-22 Thread Joonsoo Kim
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:53:35AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 03:33:58PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > When I tested my new patches, I found that page pointer which is used > > for setting page_owner information is changed. This is because page > > pointer is used to set ne

Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/page_owner: fix possible access violation

2015-07-15 Thread Minchan Kim
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 03:33:58PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > When I tested my new patches, I found that page pointer which is used > for setting page_owner information is changed. This is because page > pointer is used to set new migratetype in loop. After this work, > page pointer could be out o

[PATCH 1/2] mm/page_owner: fix possible access violation

2015-07-14 Thread Joonsoo Kim
When I tested my new patches, I found that page pointer which is used for setting page_owner information is changed. This is because page pointer is used to set new migratetype in loop. After this work, page pointer could be out of bound. If this wrong pointer is used for page_owner, access violati