From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754426AbdGJQ7Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:59:16 -0400 Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org ([85.214.110.215]:49310 "EHLO gum.cmpxchg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753903AbdGJQ7P (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:59:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:58:59 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner To: Rik van Riel Cc: Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Tetsuo Handa , Vlastimil Babka , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: do not loop on too_many_isolated for ever Message-ID: <20170710165859.GA12036@cmpxchg.org> References: <20170710074842.23175-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <1499695083.6130.38.camel@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1499695083.6130.38.camel@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 09:58:03AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Mon, 2017-07-10 at 09:48 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > Johannes and Rik had some concerns that this could lead to premature > > OOM kills. I agree with them that we need a better throttling > > mechanism. Until now we didn't give the issue described above a high > > priority because it usually required a really insane workload to > > trigger. But it seems that the issue can be reproduced also without > > having an insane number of competing threads [3]. > > My worries stand, but lets fix the real observed bug, and not worry > too much about the theoretical bug for now. > > Acked-by: Rik van Riel I agree with this. Acked-by: Johannes Weiner