Hi, this is an attempt to restart discussions regarding memcg OOM notifications and break out conditions. "memcg: do not hang on OOM when killed by userspace OOM access to memory reserves" which was a first patch in the series was already merged to -mm tree (http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/memcg-do-not-hang-on-oom-when-killed-by-userspace-oom-access-to-memory-reserves.patch) but it didn't see ack from neither David nor Johannes. I would be happy if we agreed on that one as well. The first patch in this series implements and extends an idea proposed by David to not notify userspace when the OOM killer might back out and prevent from killing. Johannes was not fond of the idea because this changes userspace interface in a subtle way because somebody might be relying on notifications as a signal that the memcg is getting into troubles. It has been argued that there are memory thresholds and vmpressure notifications for such an use case. I am in favor to make change the notification and draw the line when to notify to "kernel or userspace has to perform an action". It makes sense to me, it is still racy though. Something might have exiting millisecond after notification fired but it at least is consistent. The second patch is trivial and it removes PF_EXITING check for the current in mem_cgroup_out_of_memory because it is no longer needed when we have the check in the charging path. The last patch is just an attempt and might be totally wrong. I've noticed that we are not checking for the killed tasks in mem_cgroup_out_of_memory which might break usecases where a task was killed by vmpressure or thresholds handlers but the killed task cannot terminate in time. We should rather not kill something else. -- 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>