[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201706272039.HGG51520.QOMHFVOFtOSJFL@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 20:39:28 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@...nel.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, rientjes@...gle.com, oleg@...hat.com,
andrea@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, oom: allow oom reaper to race with exit_mmap
Michal Hocko wrote:
> > I wonder why you prefer timeout based approach. Your patch will after all
> > set MMF_OOM_SKIP if operations between down_write() and up_write() took
> > more than one second.
>
> if we reach down_write then we have unmapped the address space in
> exit_mmap and oom reaper cannot do much more.
So, by the time down_write() is called, majority of memory is already released, isn't it?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists