[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180725061722.GT28386@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 08:17:22 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
"David (ChunMing) Zhou" <David1.Zhou@....com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>,
Sudeep Dutt <sudeep.dutt@...el.com>,
Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@...el.com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers
On Tue 24-07-18 12:53:07, Andrew Morton wrote:
[...]
> > On top of that the proposed cleanup looks as follows:
> >
>
> Looks good to me. Seems a bit strange that we omit the pr_info()
> output if the mm was partially reaped - people would still want to know
> this? Not very important though.
I think that having a single output once we are done is better but I do
not have a strong opinion on this.
Btw. here is the changelog for the cleanup.
"
Andrew has noticed someinconsistencies in oom_reap_task_mm. Notably
- Undocumented return value.
- comment "failed to reap part..." is misleading - sounds like it's
referring to something which happened in the past, is in fact
referring to something which might happen in the future.
- fails to call trace_finish_task_reaping() in one case
- code duplication.
- Increases mmap_sem hold time a little by moving
trace_finish_task_reaping() inside the locked region. So sue me ;)
- Sharing the finish: path means that the trace event won't
distinguish between the two sources of finishing.
Add a short explanation for the return value and fix the rest by
reorganizing the function a bit to have unified function exit paths.
Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
"
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists