From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: killed threads should not invoke memcg OOM killer
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 22:07:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0c4748e-f024-4d5c-a233-63c269660004@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190107114139.GF31793@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2019/01/07 20:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sun 06-01-19 15:02:24, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> Michal and Johannes, can we please stop this stupid behavior now?
>
> I have proposed a patch with a much more limited scope which is still
> waiting for feedback. I haven't heard it wouldn't be working so far.
>
You mean
mutex_lock_killable would take care of exiting task already. I would
then still prefer to check for mark_oom_victim because that is not racy
with the exit path clearing signals. I can update my patch to use
_killable lock variant if we are really going with the memcg specific
fix.
? No response for two months.
One memcg OOM killer kills all processes in that memcg is broken. What is
the race you are referring by "racy with the exit path clearing signals" ?
You are saying that a thread between clearing fatal signal and setting
PF_EXITING can invoke the memcg OOM killer again, aren't you? But how likely
is that? Even if it can happen, your patch can call mark_oom_victim() even
if my patch bailed out upon SIGKILL. That is, your patch and my patch are
not conflicting/exclusive.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-07 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-26 10:13 Tetsuo Handa
2018-12-28 10:22 ` Kirill Tkhai
2018-12-28 11:00 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-12-28 11:28 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-01-06 6:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-06 6:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-07 11:41 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 13:07 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2019-01-07 13:37 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 14:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-09 10:56 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-09 10:56 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-15 10:17 ` [PATCH v2] " Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-15 11:55 ` Michal Hocko
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=b0c4748e-f024-4d5c-a233-63c269660004@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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