From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-187.mta1.migadu.com (out-187.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93F9530F7FA for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2026 18:53:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.187 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769626430; cv=none; b=YgpglkHzFsnKMM3RXDhfabgWphwZqaac4fBkIV9TmSTiuGicXz90nXMKt2ayjS7rsR2iXihJm0X4VtIMKz8Y2PohPHBZvpKiPbn+fWoNiWkG/jSeT1VpXfNjpdhaeLmzYcybiVQvQ6K9vBgvVtjCxrCWSbfxppzFqQ+9AdAgXUg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769626430; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TgeaP33jHnx3T+ks7p1hcLs6YqV+hkkXYsSw5Il6dWk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=V7xSeoIQeWBmSILPmrrzhz9P9ZowOmD+XvX0jQxbkyWNqVwtpSGspCj6rmknVF94ZwEL+qO6GyDRW759iMKy70CKRZi7wHUVrSsnE+qDqsQV7pPk4lYoSo7hi9OA/OoaU7n4ue9S1J7i/qWe4etOjXzP/glq8vvOp2u9Urg4rko= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=AiR8drud; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.187 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="AiR8drud" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1769626426; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=EJruoHUytnpG3ZhxXfZjCqC5GgpnkyryTXuXTZBPFBA=; b=AiR8drudioF/zHusMvMimGJ7lmtE6yo06ti5MBR8zPKeMC3E7W8qGAFrzChckidE7V+tcX fq06RMNyFUHzisbB8KCXW3j0bOPXDIhjTmGSs239vRQM4q9MmPdro008x7tfr5OyRGNVDa mXxOKqWlSgBItKfxXfuohXWj1nkv5KI= From: Roman Gushchin To: Michal Hocko Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Matt Bobrowski , Shakeel Butt , JP Kobryn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Suren Baghdasaryan , Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/17] mm: introduce BPF OOM struct ops In-Reply-To: (Michal Hocko's message of "Wed, 28 Jan 2026 12:19:42 +0100") References: <20260127024421.494929-1-roman.gushchin@linux.dev> <20260127024421.494929-8-roman.gushchin@linux.dev> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 10:53:20 -0800 Message-ID: <871pj91sdb.fsf@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Michal Hocko writes: > Once additional point I forgot to mention previously > > On Mon 26-01-26 18:44:10, Roman Gushchin wrote: >> @@ -1168,6 +1180,13 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) >> return true; >> } >> >> + /* >> + * Let bpf handle the OOM first. If it was able to free up some memory, >> + * bail out. Otherwise fall back to the kernel OOM killer. >> + */ >> + if (bpf_handle_oom(oc)) >> + return true; >> + >> select_bad_process(oc); >> /* Found nothing?!?! */ >> if (!oc->chosen) { > > Should this check for is_sysrq_oom and always use the in kernel OOM > handling for Sysrq triggered ooms as a failsafe measure? Yep, good point. Will implement in v4. Thanks!