From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, jsavitz@redhat.com,
peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
dvhart@infradead.org, dave@stgolabs.net,
andrealmeid@collabora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/oom: do not oom reap task with an unresolved robust futex
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 15:24:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yh9+O/xqNLnV1jmA@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <118fc685-c68d-614f-006a-7d5487302122@redhat.com>
Sorry, this has slipped through cracks.
On Mon 14-02-22 15:39:31, Nico Pache wrote:
[...]
> We've recently been discussing the following if statement in __oom_reap_task_mm:
> if (vma_is_anonymous(vma) || !(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED))
>
> Given the comment above it, and some of the upstream discussion the original
> RFC, we are struggling to see why this should be a `||` and not an `&&`. If we
> only want to reap anon memory and reaping shared memory can be dangerous is this
> statement incorrect?
>
> We have a patch queued up to make this change, but wanted to get your opinion on
> why this was originally designed this way in case we are missing something.
I do not really see why this would be wrong. Private file backed
mappings can contain a reapable memory as well. I do not see how this
would solve the futex issue.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-02 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-14 18:01 Nico Pache
2022-01-17 8:52 ` Michal Hocko
2022-01-17 16:05 ` Waiman Long
2022-01-17 22:56 ` Nico Pache
2022-01-18 8:51 ` Michal Hocko
2022-02-14 20:39 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-02 14:24 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2022-03-02 17:26 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-03 7:48 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-09 0:24 ` Nico Pache
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Yh9+O/xqNLnV1jmA@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@collabora.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=jsavitz@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox