From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-pl0-f71.google.com (mail-pl0-f71.google.com [209.85.160.71])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 246D76B000E
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Mon,  6 Aug 2018 16:26:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-pl0-f71.google.com with SMTP id z3-v6so9139425plb.16
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 13:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from www262.sakura.ne.jp (www262.sakura.ne.jp. [202.181.97.72])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u68-v6si14466172pgb.191.2018.08.06.13.26.44
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Mon, 06 Aug 2018 13:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: WARNING in try_charge
References: <fc6e173e-8bda-269f-d44f-1c5f5215beac@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <0000000000006350880572c61e62@google.com>
 <20180806174410.GB10003@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20180806175627.GC10003@dhcp22.suse.cz>
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <078bde8d-b1b5-f5ad-ed23-0cd94b579f9e@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 05:26:23 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180806175627.GC10003@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, syzbot <syzbot+bab151e82a4e973fa325@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, dvyukov@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com

On 2018/08/07 2:56, Michal Hocko wrote:
> So the oom victim indeed passed the above force path after the oom
> invocation. But later on hit the page fault path and that behaved
> differently and for some reason the force path hasn't triggered. I am
> wondering how could we hit the page fault path in the first place. The
> task is already killed! So what the hell is going on here.
> 
> I must be missing something obvious here.
> 
YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY MISSING MY MAIL!

I already said this is "mm, oom: task_will_free_mem(current) should ignore MMF_OOM_SKIP for once."
problem which you are refusing at https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg133774.html .
And you again ignored my mail. Very sad...