From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
david@fromorbit.com, tytso@mit.edu, jack@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Allow GFP_NOFS allocation to fail
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:16:30 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201509152216.EEC57388.JLQFFFSHtVOOMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201509080151.HDD35430.QtOMHSFLFVOJOF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Thoughts? Opinions?
>
> To me, fixing callers (adding __GFP_NORETRY to callers) in a step-by-step
> fashion after adding proactive countermeasure sounds better than changing
> the default behavior (implicitly applying __GFP_NORETRY inside).
>
Ping?
I showed you at http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=144198479931388 that
changing the default behavior can not terminate the game of Whack-A-Mole.
As long as there are unkillable threads, we can't kill context-sensitive
moles.
I believe that what we need to do now is to add a proactive countermeasure
(e.g. kill more processes) than try to reduce the possibility of hitting
this issue (e.g. allow !__GFP_FS to fail).
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
david@fromorbit.com, tytso@mit.edu, jack@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Allow GFP_NOFS allocation to fail
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:16:30 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201509152216.EEC57388.JLQFFFSHtVOOMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201509080151.HDD35430.QtOMHSFLFVOJOF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Thoughts? Opinions?
>
> To me, fixing callers (adding __GFP_NORETRY to callers) in a step-by-step
> fashion after adding proactive countermeasure sounds better than changing
> the default behavior (implicitly applying __GFP_NORETRY inside).
>
Ping?
I showed you at http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=144198479931388 that
changing the default behavior can not terminate the game of Whack-A-Mole.
As long as there are unkillable threads, we can't kill context-sensitive
moles.
I believe that what we need to do now is to add a proactive countermeasure
(e.g. kill more processes) than try to reduce the possibility of hitting
this issue (e.g. allow !__GFP_FS to fail).
--
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:[~2015-09-15 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-05 9:51 [RFC 0/8] Allow GFP_NOFS allocation to fail mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 1/8] mm, oom: Give __GFP_NOFAIL allocations access to memory reserves mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 2/8] mm: Allow GFP_IOFS for page_cache_read page cache allocation mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 3/8] mm: page_alloc: do not lock up GFP_NOFS allocations upon OOM mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 12:28 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-08-05 14:02 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-06 11:50 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-08-12 9:11 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-16 14:04 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 4/8] jbd, jbd2: Do not fail journal because of frozen_buffer allocation failure mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 11:42 ` Jan Kara
2015-08-05 11:42 ` Jan Kara
2015-08-05 16:49 ` Greg Thelen
2015-08-05 16:49 ` Greg Thelen
2015-08-12 9:14 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-12 9:14 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-15 13:54 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-08-15 13:54 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-08-18 10:36 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:36 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-24 12:06 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-24 12:06 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:38 ` [RFC -v2 " Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:38 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-13 21:37 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 5/8] ext4: Do not fail journal due to block allocator mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 11:43 ` Jan Kara
2015-08-05 11:43 ` Jan Kara
2015-08-18 10:39 ` [RFC -v2 " Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:39 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:55 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:55 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 6/8] ext3: Do not abort journal prematurely mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-18 10:39 ` [RFC -v2 " Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:39 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 7/8] btrfs: Prevent from early transaction abort mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 16:31 ` David Sterba
2015-08-05 16:31 ` David Sterba
2015-08-18 10:40 ` [RFC -v2 " Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:40 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 11:01 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 11:01 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 11:01 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 17:11 ` Chris Mason
2015-08-18 17:11 ` Chris Mason
2015-08-18 17:11 ` Chris Mason
2015-08-18 17:29 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 17:29 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-19 12:26 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-19 12:26 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` [RFC 8/8] btrfs: use __GFP_NOFAIL in alloc_btrfs_bio mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 9:51 ` mhocko
2015-08-05 16:32 ` David Sterba
2015-08-05 16:32 ` David Sterba
2015-08-18 10:41 ` [RFC -v2 " Michal Hocko
2015-08-18 10:41 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-05 19:58 ` [RFC 0/8] Allow GFP_NOFS allocation to fail Andreas Dilger
2015-08-05 19:58 ` Andreas Dilger
2015-08-06 14:34 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-06 14:34 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-06 14:34 ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-07 16:51 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-07 16:51 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-15 13:16 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2015-09-15 13:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=201509152216.EEC57388.JLQFFFSHtVOOMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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: link
Be 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.