From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vk0-f70.google.com (mail-vk0-f70.google.com [209.85.213.70]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79EC56B007E for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 18:04:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-vk0-f70.google.com with SMTP id c67so272891612vkh.3 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 15:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com. [209.132.183.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p68si20067593qkd.184.2016.05.20.15.04.36 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 20 May 2016 15:04:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 00:04:33 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm,oom: speed up select_bad_process() loop. Message-ID: <20160520220432.GA22324@redhat.com> References: <1463574024-8372-1-git-send-email-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20160518125138.GH21654@dhcp22.suse.cz> <201605182230.IDC73435.MVSOHLFOQFOJtF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20160518141545.GI21654@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160518140932.6643b963e8d3fc49ff64df8d@linux-foundation.org> <20160519065329.GA26110@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160520015000.GA20132@redhat.com> <20160520064244.GD19172@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160520064244.GD19172@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Tetsuo Handa , rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org On 05/20, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 20-05-16 03:50:01, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 05/19, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > Long term I > > > would like to to move this logic into the mm_struct, it would be just > > > larger surgery I guess. > > > > Why we can't do this right now? Just another MMF_ flag set only once and > > never cleared. > > It is more complicated and so more error prone. Sure, but don't we want this anyway in the long term? > We have to sort out > shortcuts which get TIF_MEMDIE without killing first. Yes, but this seems a bit "off-topic" to me... but probably I do not understand the problem enough. > And we have that > nasty "mm shared between independant processes" case there. Yes, yes, please see another email. > If you feel that this step is not really worth it No, no. Unless I see something which looks "obviously wrong" to me, I won't argue with this (or any other) change as long as you and Tetsuo agree on it. I understand that it is veru easy to blame OOM-killer (and the changes in this area), but it is not easy to fix this code ;) Oleg. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org