next-20160401+: ARM: DRA7: linux-next regression: mm/slab: clean-up kmem_cache_node setup
From: Joonsoo Kim <hidden>
Date: 2016-04-20 07:45:48
Also in:
linux-next, linux-omap, lkml
Ccing Stephen. On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 08:11:41AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
Hi Joonsoo, On 11/04/16 12:44, Jon Hunter wrote:quoted
On 11/04/16 03:02, Joonsoo Kim wrote:quoted
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:39:20PM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:quoted
Hi, http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=146014314115625&w=2 series works with v4.6-rc2 kernel, however, it fails with linux-next for suspend-to-ram (mem) on BeagleBoard-X15 next-20160327 - good next-20160329 - good next-20160330 - Fails to boot - I2C crashes next-20160331- Fails to boot - USB crashes next-20160401 -> bad next-20160408 -> bad Bisect log of next-20160408 vs v4.6-rc2 -> http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/15697856/ # first bad commit: [2b629704a2b6a5b239f23750e5517a9d8c3a4e8c] mm/slab: clean-up kmem_cache_node setupHello, I made a mistake on that patch. Could you try to test below one on top of it. Thanks. --------->8---------------- From d3af3cc409527e9be6beb62ea395cde67f3c5029 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joonsoo Kim <redacted> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 10:48:29 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] mm/slab: clean-up kmem_cache_node setup-fix After calling free_block(), we need to re-calculate array_cache's avail counter. Fix it. And, it's better to free objects in shared array when it is really necessary. Check it before calling free_block(). Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <redacted> --- mm/slab.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c index fcd5fbb..27cb390 100644 --- a/mm/slab.c +++ b/mm/slab.c@@ -927,9 +927,10 @@ static int setup_kmem_cache_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep, n = get_node(cachep, node); spin_lock_irq(&n->list_lock); - if (n->shared) { + if (n->shared && force_change) { free_block(cachep, n->shared->entry, n->shared->avail, node, &list); + n->shared->avail = 0; } if (!n->shared || force_change) {This also fixes a regression on -next for Tegra that was bisected down to the same culprit. So ... Tested-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>This fix still doesn't appear to have made it into -next and this has been broken now for nearly 3 weeks. Any chance we can get this into -next?
Sorry about that. Hello, Stephen. It seems that Andrew is busy now. I guess he will be back soon but could you merge this fix to the next tree directly? Thanks.