On Sun, 6 Mar 2011, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > There is no deadlock being introduced by this patch; if you have an > > example of one, then please show it. The problem is not just overkill but > > rather panicking the machine when no other eligible processes exist. We > > have seen this in production quite a few times and we'd like to see this > > patch merged to avoid our machines panicking because the oom killer, by > > your patch, isn't considering threads that are eligible in the exit path > > once their parent has been killed and has exited itself yet memory freeing > > isn't possible yet because the threads still pin the ->mm. > > No. While you don't understand current code, I'll not taking yours. > I take this as you declining to show your example of a deadlock introduced by this patch as requested. There is no such deadlock. The patch is reintroducing the behavior of the oom killer that existed for years before you broke it and caused many of ours machines to panic as a result. Thanks for your review. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>