From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ed1-f71.google.com (mail-ed1-f71.google.com [209.85.208.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DC76B0006 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 18:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ed1-f71.google.com with SMTP id h26-v6so176841eds.14 for ; Wed, 01 Aug 2018 15:56:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com (mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com. [67.231.153.30]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i20-v6si239344edj.108.2018.08.01.15.56.06 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Aug 2018 15:56:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:55:40 -0700 From: Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 0/7] cgroup-aware OOM killer Message-ID: <20180801225539.GB32269@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <0d018c7e-a3de-a23a-3996-bed8b28b1e4a@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20180716220918.GA3898@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <201807170055.w6H0tHn5075670@www262.sakura.ne.jp> <20180801163718.GA23539@castle> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tetsuo Handa Cc: Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Michal Hocko , Vladimir Davydov , Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo , kernel-team@fb.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 07:01:28AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/08/02 1:37, Roman Gushchin wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:14:01PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> Can we temporarily drop cgroup-aware OOM killer from linux-next.git and > >> apply my cleanup patch? Since the merge window is approaching, I really want to > >> see how next -rc1 would look like... > > > > Hi Tetsuo! > > > > Has this cleanup patch been acked by somebody? > > Not yet. But since Michal considers this cleanup as "a nice shortcut" > ( https://marc.info/?i=20180607112836.GN32433@dhcp22.suse.cz ), I assume that > I will get an ACK regarding this cleanup. > > > Which problem does it solve? > > It simplifies tricky out_of_memory() return value decision, and > it also fixes a bug in your series which syzbot is pointing out. > > > Dropping patches for making a cleanup (if it's a cleanup) sounds a bit strange. > > What I need is a git tree which I can use as a baseline for making this cleanup. > linux.git is not suitable because it does not include Michal's fix, but > linux-next.git is not suitable because Michal's fix is overwritten by your series. > I want a git tree which includes Michal's fix and does not include your series. > > > > > Anyway, there is a good chance that current cgroup-aware OOM killer > > implementation will be replaced by a lightweight version (memory.oom.group). > > Please, take a look at it, probably your cleanup will not conflict with it > > at all. > > Then, please drop current cgroup-aware OOM killer implementation from linux-next.git . > I want to see how next -rc1 would look like (for testing purpose) and want to use > linux-next.git as a baseline (for making this cleanup). I'll post memory.oom.group v2 later today, and if there will be no objections, I'll ask Andrew to drop current memcg-aware OOM killer and replace it with lightweight memory.oom.group. These changes will be picked by linux-next in few days. Thanks!