On Fri 03-06-16 21:00:31, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > Patch 8 is new in this version and it addresses an issue pointed out > > by 0-day OOM report where an oom victim was reaped several times. > > I believe we need below once-you-nacked patch as well. > > It would be possible to clear victim->signal->oom_flag_origin when > that victim gets TIF_MEMDIE, but I think that moving oom_task_origin() > test to oom_badness() will allow oom_scan_process_thread() which calls > oom_unkillable_task() only for testing task->signal->oom_victims to be > removed by also moving task->signal->oom_victims test to oom_badness(). > Thus, I prefer this way. Can we please forget about oom_task_origin for _now_. At least until we resolve the current pile? I am really skeptical oom_task_origin is a real problem and even if you think it might be and pulling its handling outside of oom_scan_process_thread would be better for other reasons we can do that later. Or do you insist this all has to be done in one go? To be honest, I feel less and less confident as the pile grows and chances of introducing new bugs just grows after each rebase which tries to address more subtle and unlikely issues. Do no take me wrong but I would rather make sure that the current pile is reviewed and no unintentional side effects are introduced than open yet another can of worms. 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>