On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 5:16 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 16:59:29 -0600 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > @@ -4109,7 +4109,7 @@ static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned > > > > long start, unsigned long end, > > > > > > > > walk_pmd_range(&val, addr, next, args); > > > > > > > > - if (mm_is_oom_victim(args->mm)) > > > > + if (test_bit(MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED, &args->mm->flags)) > > > > return 1; > > > > > > > > /* a racy check to curtail the waiting time */ > > > > > > Oh. Why? What does this change do? > > > > The MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED flag is similar to the deleted MMF_OOM_VICTIM > > flag, but it's set at a later stage during an OOM kill. > > > > When either is set, the OOM reaper is probably already freeing the > > memory of this mm_struct, or at least it's going to. So there is no > > need to dwell on it in the reclaim path, hence not about correctness. > > Thanks. That sounds worthy of some code comments? Will do. Thanks.
