From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 420A76B0093 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 09:26:01 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id l15so41309173wiw.5 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 06:26:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k1si33923754wia.95.2015.02.18.06.25.59 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Feb 2015 06:25:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:25:57 +0100 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: How to handle TIF_MEMDIE stalls? Message-ID: <20150218142557.GE4478@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20150217165024.GI32017@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20150217232552.GK4251@dastard> <20150218084842.GB4478@dhcp22.suse.cz> <201502182023.EEJ12920.QFFMOVtOSJLHFO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20150218122903.GD4478@dhcp22.suse.cz> <201502182306.HAB60908.MVQFOHJSOOFLFt@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201502182306.HAB60908.MVQFOHJSOOFLFt@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tetsuo Handa Cc: david@fromorbit.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, dchinner@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com, oleg@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, fernando_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp On Wed 18-02-15 23:06:17, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > > Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > Because they cannot perform any IO/FS transactions and that would lead > > > > to a premature OOM conditions way too easily. OOM killer is a _last > > > > resort_ reclaim opportunity not something that would happen just because > > > > you happen to be not able to flush dirty pages. > > > > > > But you should not have applied such change without making necessary > > > changes to GFP_NOFS / GFP_NOIO users with such expectation and testing > > > at linux-next.git . Applying such change after 3.19-rc6 is a sucker punch. > > > > This is a nonsense. OOM was disbaled for !__GFP_FS for ages (since > > before git era). > > > Then, at least I expect that filesystem error actions will not be taken so > trivially. Can we apply http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=142418465615672&w=2 for > Linux 3.19-stable? I do not understand. What kind of bug would be fixed by that change? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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