From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: "Wang, Biao" <biao.wang@intel.com>,
"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"arve@android.com" <arve@android.com>,
"riandrews@android.com" <riandrews@android.com>
Cc: "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Zhang, Di" <di.zhang@intel.com>, "Li, Fei" <fei.li@intel.com>,
"dan.carpenter@oracle.com" <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
"joe@perches.com" <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] staging: android: lowmemorykiller: imporve lmk to avoid deadlock issue
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 07:06:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55BF7568.1030502@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <09CB0B4607EB8F4DB7E0BE3B06BFBD051DA2E849@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On 08/02/2015 10:53 PM, Wang, Biao wrote:
> Consider the following case:
> Task A trigger lmk with a lock held, while task B try to
> get this lock, but unfortunately B is the very culprit task lmk select to
> kill. Then B will never be killed, and A will forever select B to kill.
> Such dead lock will trigger softlock up issue.
It would be interesting to have some actual data about where this helps.
For instance, which locks does this happen on? What kind of
allocation? Also, we apparently _do_ mark a lowmemorykiller victim as
an oom victim and let them use memory reserves. Why does that not allow
the allocation to complete at least long enough to get the kill signal
to the victim?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-03 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-03 5:53 [PATCH V2] staging: android: lowmemorykiller: imporve lmk to avoid deadlock issue Wang, Biao
2015-08-03 6:15 ` Dan Carpenter
2015-08-03 7:16 ` Dan Carpenter
2015-08-03 7:58 ` Joe Perches
2015-08-03 14:06 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55BF7568.1030502@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=arve@android.com \
--cc=biao.wang@intel.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=di.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=fei.li@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riandrews@android.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox