[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180806203437.GK10003@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 22:34:37 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+bab151e82a4e973fa325@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, dvyukov@...gle.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, vdavydov.dev@...il.com
Subject: Re: WARNING in try_charge
On Tue 07-08-18 05:26:23, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2018/08/07 2:56, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > So the oom victim indeed passed the above force path after the oom
> > invocation. But later on hit the page fault path and that behaved
> > differently and for some reason the force path hasn't triggered. I am
> > wondering how could we hit the page fault path in the first place. The
> > task is already killed! So what the hell is going on here.
> >
> > I must be missing something obvious here.
> >
> YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY MISSING MY MAIL!
>
> I already said this is "mm, oom: task_will_free_mem(current) should ignore MMF_OOM_SKIP for once."
> problem which you are refusing at https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg133774.html .
> And you again ignored my mail. Very sad...
Your suggestion simply didn't make much sense. There is nothing like
first check is different from the rest.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists