From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6AA3C433F5 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:46:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D82A61151 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:46:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 5D82A61151 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E18FA940008; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 03:46:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id DC7A2940007; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 03:46:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id CB6AD940008; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 03:46:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0004.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.4]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5989940007 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 03:46:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E1E018466595 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:46:20 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78748692120.23.97D4867 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF6A9508A40F for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:46:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4418D61130; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:46:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1635493578; bh=CmRFDCkM+5+pmJyXLBO216K+Ezk6KWp7TPmW78qsJGA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Gp6Cc2HU1a8QNtbNxiSGoY3igMOXEd6afDTEJNnaMinOJK5AR9NA2fs2ga1qGoTD/ CDyxRzdSb3VpwHi4N+coZss6O1S0hj9Uld35ZI2dpq5sjLgXvX0W1AvkOePCe1k6Ot fiEm76PEnRlwWhI8VvKz5OsWVts1V8Yd3s83maT4= Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:46:16 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Vasily Averin Cc: Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Roman Gushchin , Uladzislau Rezki , Vlastimil Babka , Shakeel Butt , Mel Gorman , Tetsuo Handa , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@openvz.org Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg v3 3/3] memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks Message-ID: References: <8f5cebbb-06da-4902-91f0-6566fc4b4203@virtuozzo.com> <20211027153608.9910f7db99d5ef574045370e@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Stat-Signature: 6i3rk7stcpjitt9jiqzeg6mmyi88q5rc Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.s=korg header.b=Gp6Cc2HU; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of gregkh@linuxfoundation.org designates 198.145.29.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AF6A9508A40F X-HE-Tag: 1635493571-584404 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:22:56AM +0300, Vasily Averin wrote: > On 28.10.2021 01:36, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 11:36:41 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > > > >> My view on stable backport is similar to the previous patch. If we want > >> to have it there then let's wait for some time to see whether there are > >> any fallouts as this patch depends on the PF_OOM change. > > > > It's strange that [1/3] doesn't have cc:stable, but [2/3] and [3/3] do > > not. What is the thinking here? > > My fault, I missed it. > All 3 patches should be backported, > I did it already to stables kernels since 4.4 and I'm ready to submit it in demand. > > > I expect we'd be OK with merging these into 5.16-rc1. This still gives > > another couple of months in -rc to shake out any problems. But I > > suspect the -stable maintainers will merge and release the patches > > before they are released in 5.16. > > > > In which case an alternative would be not to mark these patches > > cc:stable and to somehow remember to ask the -stable maintainers to > > merge them after 5.16 has been on the streets for a suitable period. > > > > Greg, thoughts? > > If you wish I can remind Greg in a month or even after 5.17 release. Please remind us then, otherwise I will not remember :) thanks, greg k-h