[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201604132227.BDI51567.VMOFOHFOLQtSFJ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 22:27:52 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@...nel.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom: consider multi-threaded tasks in task_will_free_mem
Michal Hocko wrote:
> > The whole thread group is going down does not mean we make sure that
> > we will send SIGKILL to other thread groups sharing the same memory which
> > is possibly holding mmap_sem for write, does it?
>
> And the patch description doesn't say anything about processes sharing
> mm. This is supposed to be a minor fix of an obviously suboptimal
> behavior of task_will_free_mem. Can we stick to the proposed patch,
> please?
>
> If we really do care about processes sharing mm _that_much_ then it
> should be handled in the separate patch.
I do care. The OOM reaper cannot work unless SIGKILL is sent to a thread
which is holding mmap_sem for write. Thus, sending SIGKILL to all thread
groups sharing the mm is needed by your down_write_killable(&mm->mmap_sem)
changes. Like I wrote at
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201604092300.BDI39040.FFSQLJOMHOOVtF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp ,
we cannot fix that problem unless you accept the slowpath.
I don't like you don't explain your approach for handling the slowpath.
If you explain your approach for handling the slowpath and I agree on
your approach, I will also agree on the proposed patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists