On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 15:24 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:15:29AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Explicitly adding the emails of other people involved with that commit > > and the original oom thread to make sure people are aware, since this > > didn't get any response. > > > > Commit cc87317726f8 fixed some behavior, but also seems to have turned > > an oom situation into a complete hang. So presumably we shouldn't loop > > *forever*. Hmm? > > It seems we are between a rock and a hard place here, as we reverted > specifically to that endless looping on request of filesystem people. > They said[1] they rely on these allocations never returning NULL, or > they might fail inside a transactions and corrupt on-disk data. > > Huang, against which kernels did you first run this test on this exact > setup? Is there a chance you could try to run a kernel without/before > 9879de7373fc? I want to make sure I'm not missing something, but all > versions preceding this commit should also have the same hang. There > should only be a tiny window between 9879de7373fc and cc87317726f8 -- > v3.19 -- where these allocations are allowed to fail. I checked the test result of v3.19-rc6. It shows that boot will hang at the same position. BTW: the test is run on 32 bit system. Best Regards, Huang, Ying -- 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>