On Wed 17-02-16 19:41:53, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > although this can be folded into patch 5 > > (mm-oom_reaper-implement-oom-victims-queuing.patch) I think it would be > > better to have it separate and revert after we sort out the proper > > oom_kill_allocating_task behavior or handle exclusion at oom_reaper > > level. > > What a rough workaround. sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task == 1 does not > always mean we must skip OOM reaper, for OOM-unkillable callers take > sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task == 0 path. Yes it is indeed rough but also shouldn't add new issues. I consider oom_kill_allocating_task as a borderline which can be sorted out later. So while I do not like workarounds like this in general I would rather go with obvious code first before going for more complex solutions. > I've just posted a patchset which allows you to merge the OOM reaper > without correcting problems found in "[PATCH 3/5] oom: clear TIF_MEMDIE > after oom_reaper managed to unmap the address space" and "[PATCH 5/5] > mm, oom_reaper: implement OOM victims queuing". I will try to look at your patches but the series seems unnecessarily heavy to be a pre-requisite for the oom_reaper. Thanks! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>