linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] OOM detection rework v4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 22:32:02 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:	mhocko@...nel.org
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...e.de, rientjes@...gle.com,
	hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] OOM detection rework v4

Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 11-03-16 19:45:29, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > (Posting as a reply to this thread.)
> 
> I really do not see how this is related to this thread.

All allocating tasks are looping at

                        /*
                         * If we didn't make any progress and have a lot of
                         * dirty + writeback pages then we should wait for
                         * an IO to complete to slow down the reclaim and
                         * prevent from pre mature OOM
                         */
                        if (!did_some_progress && 2*(writeback + dirty) > reclaimable) {
                                congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
                                return true;
                        }

in should_reclaim_retry().

should_reclaim_retry() was added by OOM detection rework, wan't it?