From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] mm, oom: refactor oom detection
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:18:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151030101819.GI18429@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56333B4A.4030602@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Fri 30-10-15 18:41:30, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
[...]
> >>So, now, 0-order page allocation may fail in a OOM situation ?
> >
> >No they don't normally and this patch doesn't change the logic here.
> >
>
> I understand your patch doesn't change the behavior.
> Looking into __alloc_pages_may_oom(), *did_some_progress is finally set by
>
> if (out_of_memory(&oc) || WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL))
> *did_some_progress = 1;
>
> ...depends on out_of_memory() return value.
> Now, allocation may fail if oom-killer is disabled.... Isn't it complicated ?
Yes and there shouldn't be any allocations after OOM killer has been
disabled. The userspace is already frozen and there shouldn't be any
other memory activity.
> Shouldn't we have
>
> if (order < PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
> goto retry;
>
> here ?
How could we move on during the suspend if the reclaim doesn't proceed
and we cannot really kill anything to free up memory resources. We are
simply past the moment any userspace can be woken up. Anyway this is
tangent to this particular patch series.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-30 10:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-29 15:17 RFC: OOM detection rework v1 mhocko
2015-10-29 15:17 ` [RFC 1/3] mm, oom: refactor oom detection mhocko
2015-10-30 4:10 ` Hillf Danton
2015-10-30 8:36 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-30 10:14 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-30 13:32 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-30 14:55 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-31 3:57 ` Hillf Danton
2015-10-30 5:23 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2015-10-30 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-30 9:41 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2015-10-30 10:18 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2015-11-12 12:39 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-29 15:17 ` [RFC 2/3] mm: throttle on IO only when there are too many dirty and writeback pages mhocko
2015-10-30 4:18 ` Hillf Danton
2015-10-30 8:37 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-30 5:48 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2015-10-30 8:38 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-29 15:17 ` [RFC 3/3] mm: use watermak checks for __GFP_REPEAT high order allocations mhocko
2015-11-12 12:44 ` RFC: OOM detection rework v1 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=20151030101819.GI18429@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).