From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [Bug #13058] First hibernation attempt fails Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:07:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20090422130705.GA16186@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20090417063007.GB4593@kernel.dk> <49E83DC4.8040207@tuffmail.co.uk> <20090417091321.GP4593@kernel.dk> <20090407080632.GG1408@ucw.cz> <20090420122044.7ea6cc15.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090420195306.GA3299@elf.ucw.cz> <20090420130412.bc337673.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090420163734.b8e24fc9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090420163734.b8e24fc9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Andrew Morton Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk, rjw@sisk.pl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org Hi! > Of course, this will protect the calling task from getting oom-killed. > But it doesn't protect other tasks from getting oom-killed due to the > activity of _this_ task. > > But I think that problem already exists, and that this proposal doesn't > worsen anything, yes? > > Or is it the case that all other tasks are safely stuck in the freezer > at this time, so they won't be allocating any memory anyway? That is the idea, yes. ... but we now have more threads that are not freezable... so they may allocate the memory. Is it non-feasible to free memory without really going and allocating everything? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html