From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Cc: guro@fb.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, kernel-team@fb.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: fix oom invocation issues Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 17:01:47 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170518150147.GB13940@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20170518142901.GA13940@dhcp22.suse.cz> On Thu 18-05-17 16:29:01, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 18-05-17 22:57:10, Tetsuo Handa wrote: [...] > > Anyway, I want > > > > /* Avoid allocations with no watermarks from looping endlessly */ > > - if (test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE)) > > + if (alloc_flags == ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS && test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE)) > > goto nopage; > > > > so that we won't see similar backtraces and memory information from both > > out_of_memory() and warn_alloc(). > > I do not think this is an improvement and it is unrelated to the > discussion here. I am sorry, I've misread the diff. It was the comment below the diff which confused me. Now that I looked at it again it actually makes sense. I would still like to get rid of out_of_memory from pagefault_out_of_memory but doing the above sounds safer for the stable backport. Care to create a proper patch with the full changelog, please? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Cc: guro@fb.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, kernel-team@fb.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: fix oom invocation issues Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 17:01:47 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170518150147.GB13940@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20170518142901.GA13940@dhcp22.suse.cz> On Thu 18-05-17 16:29:01, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 18-05-17 22:57:10, Tetsuo Handa wrote: [...] > > Anyway, I want > > > > /* Avoid allocations with no watermarks from looping endlessly */ > > - if (test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE)) > > + if (alloc_flags == ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS && test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE)) > > goto nopage; > > > > so that we won't see similar backtraces and memory information from both > > out_of_memory() and warn_alloc(). > > I do not think this is an improvement and it is unrelated to the > discussion here. I am sorry, I've misread the diff. It was the comment below the diff which confused me. Now that I looked at it again it actually makes sense. I would still like to get rid of out_of_memory from pagefault_out_of_memory but doing the above sounds safer for the stable backport. Care to create a proper patch with the full changelog, please? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-18 15:01 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-05-17 15:26 [PATCH] mm,oom: fix oom invocation issues Roman Gushchin 2017-05-17 15:26 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-05-17 16:14 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-17 16:14 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-17 19:43 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-05-17 19:43 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-05-17 22:03 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-05-17 22:03 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-05-18 8:47 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 8:47 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 9:00 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 9:00 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 13:20 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-05-18 13:20 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-05-18 13:57 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-05-18 13:57 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-05-18 14:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 14:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 14:57 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-05-18 14:57 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-05-18 15:07 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 15:07 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 15:01 ` Michal Hocko [this message] 2017-05-18 15:01 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 8:01 ` Michal Hocko 2017-05-18 8:01 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20170518150147.GB13940@dhcp22.suse.cz \ --to=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=guro@fb.com \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \ --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.