On Fri 11-01-19 19:25:22, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2019/01/11 8:59, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > Michal Hocko wrote: > >> On Wed 09-01-19 20:34:46, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >>> On 2019/01/09 20:03, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>>> Tetsuo, > >>>> can you confirm that these two patches are fixing the issue you have > >>>> reported please? > >>>> > >>> > >>> My patch fixes the issue better than your "[PATCH 2/2] memcg: do not > >>> report racy no-eligible OOM tasks" does. > >> > >> OK, so we are stuck again. Hooray! > > > > Andrew, will you pick up "[PATCH 3/2] memcg: Facilitate termination of memcg OOM victims." ? > > Since mm-oom-marks-all-killed-tasks-as-oom-victims.patch does not call mark_oom_victim() > > when task_will_free_mem() == true, memcg-do-not-report-racy-no-eligible-oom-tasks.patch > > does not close the race whereas my patch closes the race better. > > > > I confirmed that mm-oom-marks-all-killed-tasks-as-oom-victims.patch and > memcg-do-not-report-racy-no-eligible-oom-tasks.patch are completely failing > to fix the issue I am reporting. :-( OK, this is really interesting. This means that we are racing when marking all the tasks sharing the mm with the clone syscall. Does fatal_signal_pending handle this better? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
