From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F12ABC43141 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:35:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9638D20652 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:35:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=cmpxchg.org header.i=@cmpxchg.org header.b="rhYX6VY0" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9638D20652 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=cmpxchg.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754079AbeFUOfb (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:35:31 -0400 Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org ([85.214.110.215]:48740 "EHLO gum.cmpxchg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750806AbeFUOfa (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:35:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cmpxchg.org ; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject: Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=G5JHiVjcmIJqXosJFomg7k1ePFiaho4lsxfFGSeVsAY=; b=rhYX6VY0MsUwsbHc0Nf8rqKYZg SKqkJ+F2/ApbJnWIWVSwJYQQfAyCloI5omkhkrRzKY46zzRy7I7eAlduDMea83r1vNlVKJ+TFZoOb MSnuS+cokQ0jlYRX+YEy61AoQrLHptPP4S8VZUVc0vz8R8MsK10Wk6/7lWS5GwxRJTBk=; Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:37:51 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Greg Thelen , Shakeel Butt , Andrew Morton , LKML Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] memcg, oom: move out_of_memory back to the charge path Message-ID: <20180621143751.GA11230@cmpxchg.org> References: <20180620103736.13880-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20180621080927.GE10465@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180621080927.GE10465@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:09:27AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > @@ -496,14 +496,14 @@ void mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > static inline void mem_cgroup_oom_enable(void) > { > - WARN_ON(current->memcg_may_oom); > - current->memcg_may_oom = 1; > + WARN_ON(current->in_user_fault); > + current->in_user_fault = 1; > } > > static inline void mem_cgroup_oom_disable(void) > { > - WARN_ON(!current->memcg_may_oom); > - current->memcg_may_oom = 0; > + WARN_ON(!current->in_user_fault); > + current->in_user_fault = 0; > } Would it make more sense to rename these to mem_cgroup_enter_user_fault(), mem_cgroup_exit_user_fault()? Other than that, this looks great to me. Thanks