From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751459AbdAPHfr (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2017 02:35:47 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44164 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750862AbdAPHfp (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2017 02:35:45 -0500 Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 08:35:41 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Vladimir Davydov , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, memcg: do not retry precharge charges Message-ID: <20170116073540.GB7981@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170113084014.GB25212@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170114162238.GD26139@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat 14-01-17 21:42:48, David Rientjes wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jan 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > The OOM killer livelock was the motivation for this patch. With that > > ruled out, what's the point of this patch? Try a bit less hard to move > > charges during task migration? > > > > Most important part is to fail ->can_attach() instead of oom killing > processes when attaching a process to a memcg hierarchy. But we are not invoking the oom killer from this path even without __GFP_NORETRY. Or am I missing your point? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f71.google.com (mail-wm0-f71.google.com [74.125.82.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB856B0033 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 02:35:45 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm0-f71.google.com with SMTP id v77so6301138wmv.5 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 23:35:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h6si515300wrb.227.2017.01.15.23.35.43 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 15 Jan 2017 23:35:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 08:35:41 +0100 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, memcg: do not retry precharge charges Message-ID: <20170116073540.GB7981@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170113084014.GB25212@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170114162238.GD26139@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Rientjes Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Vladimir Davydov , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Sat 14-01-17 21:42:48, David Rientjes wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jan 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > The OOM killer livelock was the motivation for this patch. With that > > ruled out, what's the point of this patch? Try a bit less hard to move > > charges during task migration? > > > > Most important part is to fail ->can_attach() instead of oom killing > processes when attaching a process to a memcg hierarchy. But we are not invoking the oom killer from this path even without __GFP_NORETRY. Or am I missing your point? -- 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: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, memcg: do not retry precharge charges Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 08:35:41 +0100 Message-ID: <20170116073540.GB7981@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170113084014.GB25212@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170114162238.GD26139@cmpxchg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: David Rientjes Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Vladimir Davydov , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org On Sat 14-01-17 21:42:48, David Rientjes wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jan 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > The OOM killer livelock was the motivation for this patch. With that > > ruled out, what's the point of this patch? Try a bit less hard to move > > charges during task migration? > > > > Most important part is to fail ->can_attach() instead of oom killing > processes when attaching a process to a memcg hierarchy. But we are not invoking the oom killer from this path even without __GFP_NORETRY. Or am I missing your point? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs