[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201602171941.EHF67212.HOFSFFJMtOOQLV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:41:53 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: rientjes@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, oleg@...hat.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, hughd@...gle.com, andrea@...nel.org,
riel@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/5] oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for
Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> although this can be folded into patch 5
> (mm-oom_reaper-implement-oom-victims-queuing.patch) I think it would be
> better to have it separate and revert after we sort out the proper
> oom_kill_allocating_task behavior or handle exclusion at oom_reaper
> level.
What a rough workaround. sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task == 1 does not
always mean we must skip OOM reaper, for OOM-unkillable callers take
sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task == 0 path.
I've just posted a patchset which allows you to merge the OOM reaper
without correcting problems found in "[PATCH 3/5] oom: clear TIF_MEMDIE
after oom_reaper managed to unmap the address space" and "[PATCH 5/5]
mm, oom_reaper: implement OOM victims queuing".
Powered by blists - more mailing lists