Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757952Ab3FLUhL (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:37:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f41.google.com ([74.125.83.41]:65491 "EHLO mail-ee0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753331Ab3FLUhJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:37:09 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:37:05 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] memcg: do not sleep on OOM waitqueue with full charge context Message-ID: <20130612203705.GB17282@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20130606053315.GB9406@cmpxchg.org> <20130606173355.GB27226@cmpxchg.org> <20130606215425.GM15721@cmpxchg.org> <20130607000222.GT15576@cmpxchg.org> <20130612082817.GA6706@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1591 Lines: 35 On Wed 12-06-13 13:12:09, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Reported-by: azurIt > > > > > > Ok, so the key here is that azurIt was able to reliably reproduce this > > > issue and now it has been resurrected after seven months of silence since > > > that thread. I also notice that azurIt isn't cc'd on this thread. Do we > > > know if this is still a problem? > > > > I have backported the patch for his 3.2 and waiting for his feedback. > > > > Ok, thanks. I thought this was only going seven months back when it was > reported, I missed that the issue this patch is trying to address goes > back a 1 1/2 years to 3.2 and nobody else has reported it. I think his > feedback would be the key, specifically if he can upgrade to a later > kernel first. The patch is a big improvement with a minimum code overhead. Blocking any task which sits on top of an unpredictable amount of locks is just broken. So regardless how many users are affected we should merge it and backport to stable trees. The problem is there since ever. We seem to be surprisingly lucky to not hit this more often. I am not quite sure I understand your reservation about the patch to be honest. Andrew still hasn't merged this one although 1/2 is in. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/