On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:13:19 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:58:05 -0800 (PST) > David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, David Rientjes wrote: > > > > > Ok, I'll eliminate pagefault_out_of_memory() and get it to use > > > out_of_memory() by only checking for constrained_alloc() when > > > gfp_mask != 0. > > > > > > > What do you think about making pagefaults use out_of_memory() directly and > > respecting the sysctl_panic_on_oom settings? > > > > I don't think this patch is good. Because several memcg can > cause oom at the same time independently, system-wide oom locking is > unsuitable. And basically. memcg's oom means "the usage over the limits!!" and does never means "resouce is exhausted!!". Then, marking OOM to zones sounds strange. You can cause oom in 64MB memcg in 64GB system. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>