Michal Hocko wrote:
> for write while write but the probability is reduced considerably wrt.
Is this "while write" garbage?
> Users of mmap_sem which need it for write should be carefully reviewed
> to use _killable waiting as much as possible and reduce allocations
> requests done with the lock held to absolute minimum to reduce the risk
> even further.
It will be nice if we can have down_write_killable()/down_read_killable().
> The API between oom killer and oom reaper is quite trivial. wake_oom_reaper
> updates mm_to_reap with cmpxchg to guarantee only NUll->mm transition
NULL->mm
> and oom_reaper clear this atomically once it is done with the work.
Can't oom_reaper() become as compact as below?
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 3f22efc..c2ab7f9 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -472,21 +472,10 @@ static void oom_reap_vmas(struct mm_struct *mm)
static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
{
- DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
-
while (true) {
- struct mm_struct *mm;
-
- prepare_to_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
- mm = READ_ONCE(mm_to_reap);
- if (!mm) {
- freezable_schedule();
- finish_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait);
- } else {
- finish_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait);
- oom_reap_vmas(mm);
- WRITE_ONCE(mm_to_reap, NULL);
- }
+ wait_event_freezable(oom_reaper_wait, mm_to_reap);
+ oom_reap_vmas(mm_to_reap);
+ mm_to_reap = NULL;
}
return 0;
--
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>