From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752176AbdHOM3V (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:29:21 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53827 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751070AbdHOM3U (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:29:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 14:29:16 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andrea Argangeli , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Tetsuo Handa , Oleg Nesterov , Wenwei Tao , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm, oom: fix oom_reaper fallouts Message-ID: <20170815122915.GF29067@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170807113839.16695-1-mhocko@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170807113839.16695-1-mhocko@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 07-08-17 13:38:37, Michal Hocko wrote: > Hi, > there are two issues this patch series attempts to fix. First one is > something that has been broken since MMF_UNSTABLE flag introduction > and I guess we should backport it stable trees (patch 1). The other > issue has been brought up by Wenwei Tao and Tetsuo Handa has created > a test case to trigger it very reliably. I am not yet sure this is a > stable material because the test case is rather artificial. If there is > a demand for the stable backport I will prepare it, of course, though. > > I hope I've done the second patch correctly but I would definitely > appreciate some more eyes on it. Hence CCing Andrea and Kirill. My > previous attempt with some more context was posted here > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170803135902.31977-1-mhocko@kernel.org > > My testing didn't show anything unusual with these two applied on top of > the mmotm tree. unless anybody object can we have this merged? Whether to push this to the stable tree is still questionable because it requires a rather artificial workload to trigger the issue but if others think it would be better to have it backported I will prepare backports for all relevant stable trees. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f198.google.com (mail-wr0-f198.google.com [209.85.128.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BD86B02B4 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:29:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-f198.google.com with SMTP id k71so1066189wrc.15 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:29:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l68si7360427wrc.508.2017.08.15.05.29.19 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 14:29:16 +0200 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm, oom: fix oom_reaper fallouts Message-ID: <20170815122915.GF29067@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170807113839.16695-1-mhocko@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170807113839.16695-1-mhocko@kernel.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andrea Argangeli , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Tetsuo Handa , Oleg Nesterov , Wenwei Tao , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML On Mon 07-08-17 13:38:37, Michal Hocko wrote: > Hi, > there are two issues this patch series attempts to fix. First one is > something that has been broken since MMF_UNSTABLE flag introduction > and I guess we should backport it stable trees (patch 1). The other > issue has been brought up by Wenwei Tao and Tetsuo Handa has created > a test case to trigger it very reliably. I am not yet sure this is a > stable material because the test case is rather artificial. If there is > a demand for the stable backport I will prepare it, of course, though. > > I hope I've done the second patch correctly but I would definitely > appreciate some more eyes on it. Hence CCing Andrea and Kirill. My > previous attempt with some more context was posted here > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170803135902.31977-1-mhocko@kernel.org > > My testing didn't show anything unusual with these two applied on top of > the mmotm tree. unless anybody object can we have this merged? Whether to push this to the stable tree is still questionable because it requires a rather artificial workload to trigger the issue but if others think it would be better to have it backported I will prepare backports for all relevant stable trees. -- 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