[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201510010020.JHJ26534.VFLOQFOOtSHJFM@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:20:57 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: oleg@...hat.com
Cc: rientjes@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kwalker@...hat.com,
mhocko@...nel.org, skozina@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrongfatal_signal_pending()
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > This fatal_signal_pending() check is about to be added by me because the OOM
> > killer spams the kernel log when the mm struct which the OOM victim is using
> > is shared by many threads. ( http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=143256441501204 )
>
> OK, I see, but it is wrong.
>
> But I don't really understand "shared by many threads", I mean "threads" is
> confusing word. I guess you mean CLONE_VM processes, otherwise we shouldn't
> see the additional spam.
Right.
>
> And 1000 CLONE_VM processes + "and the lock dependency prevents all threads
> except the OOM victim thread from terminating until they get TIF_MEMDIE flag"
> look like a really pathological case...
Right. But I saw that
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201509271451.DEB86404.tMFFHSVQFOLOOJ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp
took 3 minites to kill one mm struct because dump_header() was called for many
times.
> > I was waiting for your comment about whether you depend on
> > the "sharing same memory" message with KERN_ERR level.
> > ( http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=144120389203133 )
> >
> > If nobody else objects, I think we can remove the "sharing same memory"
> > message. ( http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=144119325831959 )
>
> OK, will you agree with v2 which also removes pr_warn?
Yes.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists