Hi Marcelo,
attached patch fixes the oom killer braindamage where it tries to kill
processes again and again and again w/o any ending or successfull killing of
the selected processes in an OOM case.
The attached, very simple but effective, patch fixes it.
All the kudos go to Rik van Riel.
Patch tested and works, and also for a long time in my tree (and maybe also
others?!)
This issue is out there for several years.
Please consider it for 2.4.21-rc5, thanks.
ciao, Marc
On Tue, 27 May 2003, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> Hi Marcelo,
>
> attached patch fixes the oom killer braindamage where it tries to kill
> processes again and again and again w/o any ending or successfull killing of
> the selected processes in an OOM case.
>
> The attached, very simple but effective, patch fixes it.
>
> All the kudos go to Rik van Riel.
>
> Patch tested and works, and also for a long time in my tree (and maybe also
> others?!)
>
> This issue is out there for several years.
>
> Please consider it for 2.4.21-rc5, thanks.
Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:12, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Marcelo,
> > Please consider it for 2.4.21-rc5, thanks.
> Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
well, not my fault ;-) Rik sent this while -pre time and after I saw it wasn't
applied I sent it again while -pre time.
*scnr*
Well, please apply it for 2.4.22-pre1 then. Thanks
ciao, Marc
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:05:45PM +0200, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> Hi Marcelo,
> attached patch fixes the oom killer braindamage where it tries to kill
> processes again and again and again w/o any ending or successfull killing of
> the selected processes in an OOM case.
> The attached, very simple but effective, patch fixes it.
> All the kudos go to Rik van Riel.
> Patch tested and works, and also for a long time in my tree (and maybe also
> others?!)
> This issue is out there for several years.
> Please consider it for 2.4.21-rc5, thanks.
> ciao, Marc
Also in 2.5.x for some time.
-- wli
On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:18, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
Hi again ^3 ;)
> > Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
Please, if there is any chance we can fix the pause/stop bug, delay .21 final
for some hours or a day (or maybe two)
I've CC'ed akpm and Axboe. I think they are the only ones knowing enough about
the code to see an obvious error and even fixing the bug?!
Do you agree? Does anyone else agree? Or disagree?
ciao, Marc
On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:18, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
Hi again,
> > Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
BTW: This breaks _nothing_. It _fixes_ an annoying bug! ;)
> well, not my fault ;-) Rik sent this while -pre time and after I saw it
> wasn't applied I sent it again while -pre time.
ciao, Marc
On Tue, 27 May 2003, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:18, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> > > Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
> BTW: This breaks _nothing_. It _fixes_ an annoying bug! ;)
You're not completly sure it doesnt break nothing. MM/VM can be reallly
subtle and nasty at times.
On Tue, May 27 2003, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:18, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
>
> Hi again ^3 ;)
>
> > > Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
> Please, if there is any chance we can fix the pause/stop bug, delay .21 final
> for some hours or a day (or maybe two)
>
> I've CC'ed akpm and Axboe. I think they are the only ones knowing enough about
> the code to see an obvious error and even fixing the bug?!
>
> Do you agree? Does anyone else agree? Or disagree?
I have to agree with Marcelo, nothing in ll_rw_blk is obvious enough to
just be changed at will in -rc5 time.
I need to catch up with this thread, hopefully we can get things fixed
around 2.4.22-early.
--
Jens Axboe
On Tue, 27 May 2003, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:18, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
>
> Hi again ^3 ;)
>
> > > Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
> Please, if there is any chance we can fix the pause/stop bug, delay .21 final
> for some hours or a day (or maybe two)
>
> I've CC'ed akpm and Axboe. I think they are the only ones knowing enough about
> the code to see an obvious error and even fixing the bug?!
>
> Do you agree? Does anyone else agree? Or disagree?
Few points:
- 2.4.22 is going to be a short release, meaning we will have this
bug fixed soon in a final release.
- the bug is around for quite some time now, its not very critical.
- its -rc stage.
Moreover, -rc5 is already out.
I will work with Jens, Axboe and Andrea to get this properly fixed in .22
in case Andrea patch is not OK.
On Tuesday 27 May 2003 21:34, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Marcelo,
> - 2.4.22 is going to be a short release, meaning we will have this
> bug fixed soon in a final release.
> - the bug is around for quite some time now, its not very critical.
> - its -rc stage.
k.
> I will work with Jens, Axboe and Andrea to get this properly fixed in .22
> in case Andrea patch is not OK.
great. Just remember: fix-pausing-2 fix does _not_ fix the pauses/stops/mouse
is dead/keyboard is dead/ problem. It fixes the "process stuck in D state"
problem.
Please bear it in mind.
ciao, Marc
Hi!
> > > > Not suitable for -rc. Btw, -rc5 is already at bkbits.net.
> > BTW: This breaks _nothing_. It _fixes_ an annoying bug! ;)
>
> You're not completly sure it doesnt break nothing. MM/VM can be reallly
> subtle and nasty at times.
OOM killer is nor subtle nor nasty. And not normally used. That patch
really should be safe.
Pavel
--
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]