Re: [PATCH 00 of 16] OOM related fixes

William Lee Irwin III
2007-06-08T21:26:10Z

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 10:02:58PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> this is a set of fixes done in the context of a quite evil workload reading
> from nfs large files with big read buffers in parallel from many tasks at
> the same time until the system goes oom. Mostly all of these fixes seems to be
> required to fix the customer workload on top of an older sles kernel. The
> forward port of the fixes has been already tested successfully on similar evil
> workloads.
> mainline vanilla running a somewhat simulated workload:
[...]

Interesting. This seems to demonstrate a need for file IO to handle
fatal signals, beyond just people wanting faster responses to kill -9.
Perhaps it's the case that fatal signals should always be handled, and
there should be no waiting primitives excluding them. __GFP_NOFAIL is
also "interesting."

-- wli