From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-f197.google.com (mail-qt0-f197.google.com [209.85.216.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969B244084A for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 09:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qt0-f197.google.com with SMTP id r30so51517233qtc.5 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 06:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com. [209.132.183.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z17si10622749qkb.21.2017.07.10.06.58.07 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Jul 2017 06:58:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1499695083.6130.38.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: do not loop on too_many_isolated for ever From: Rik van Riel Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 09:58:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170710074842.23175-1-mhocko@kernel.org> References: <20170710074842.23175-1-mhocko@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton Cc: Mel Gorman , Tetsuo Handa , Johannes Weiner , Vlastimil Babka , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Michal Hocko 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 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org