From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Joel Savitz <jsavitz@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
Christoph von Recklinghausen <crecklin@redhat.com>,
Don Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>,
"Herton R . Krzesinski" <herton@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
Andre Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] mm/oom_kill.c: futex: Close a race between do_exit and the oom_reaper
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 19:57:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220322025724.j3japdo5qocwgchz@offworld> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c8bb0b6d-981c-8591-d5b6-17414c934758@redhat.com>
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Nico Pache wrote:
>We could proceed with the V3 approach; however if we are able to find a complete
>solution that keeps both functionalities (Concurrent OOM Reaping & Robust Futex)
>working, I dont see why we wouldnt go for it.
Because semantically killing the process is, imo, the wrong thing to do. My
performance argument before however is bogus as the overhead of robust futexes
is pretty negligible within the lifetime of a lock. That said, the users still
have good(?) reasons for not wanting the lock holder to crash on them.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-22 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-18 3:36 [PATCH v5] mm/oom_kill.c: futex: Close a race between do_exit and the oom_reaper Nico Pache
2022-03-21 8:55 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-21 22:45 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-22 0:42 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2022-03-22 1:53 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-22 2:57 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2022-03-22 3:09 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-22 8:26 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-22 15:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-22 16:36 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-22 22:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 9:17 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-23 10:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 11:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-30 9:18 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-30 18:18 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-30 21:36 ` Nico Pache
2022-04-06 17:22 ` Nico Pache
2022-04-06 17:36 ` Nico Pache
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=20220322025724.j3japdo5qocwgchz@offworld \
--to=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@collabora.com \
--cc=aquini@redhat.com \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=crecklin@redhat.com \
--cc=ddutile@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=herton@redhat.com \
--cc=jsavitz@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.