[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170113121536.GK14894@pathway.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 13:15:36 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
mhocko@...e.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: Wait for oom_lock before retrying.
On Fri 2017-01-13 20:50:24, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (01/13/17 12:03), Petr Mladek wrote:
> [..]
> > > why can't we?
> >
> > Because it would newer call cond_resched() in non-preemptive kernel
> > with CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT disabled. IMHO, we want to call it,
> > for example, when we scroll the entire screen from tty_operations.
> >
> > Or do I miss anything?
>
> so... basically. it has never called cond_resched() there. right?
> why is this suddenly a problem now?
But it called cond_resched() when the very same code was called
from tty operations under console_lock() that forced
console_may_schedule = 1;
It will never call cond_resched() from the tty operations
when CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT is disabled and we try to detect
the preemption automatically.
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists