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
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 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 \ --subject='Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: fix oom invocation issues' \ /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
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.