Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754154AbbFSHcM (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2015 03:32:12 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53023 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754074AbbFSHcE (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2015 03:32:04 -0400 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:32:02 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] mm, oom: pass an oom order of -1 when triggered by sysrq Message-ID: <20150619073202.GD4913@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3210 Lines: 104 On Thu 18-06-15 16:00:07, David Rientjes wrote: > The force_kill member of struct oom_context isn't needed if an order of > -1 is used instead. But this doesn't make much sense to me. It is not like we would _have_ to spare few bytes here. The meaning of force_kill is clear while order with a weird value is a hack. It is harder to follow without any good reason. > This patch introduces no functional change. > > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes > --- > drivers/tty/sysrq.c | 3 +-- > include/linux/oom.h | 1 - > mm/memcontrol.c | 1 - > mm/oom_kill.c | 5 ++--- > mm/page_alloc.c | 1 - > 5 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/sysrq.c b/drivers/tty/sysrq.c > --- a/drivers/tty/sysrq.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/sysrq.c > @@ -358,8 +358,7 @@ static void moom_callback(struct work_struct *ignored) > .zonelist = node_zonelist(first_memory_node, gfp_mask), > .nodemask = NULL, > .gfp_mask = gfp_mask, > - .order = 0, > - .force_kill = true, > + .order = -1, > }; > > mutex_lock(&oom_lock); > diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h > --- a/include/linux/oom.h > +++ b/include/linux/oom.h > @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ struct oom_control { > nodemask_t *nodemask; > gfp_t gfp_mask; > int order; > - bool force_kill; > }; > > /* > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -1550,7 +1550,6 @@ static void mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask, > .nodemask = NULL, > .gfp_mask = gfp_mask, > .order = order, > - .force_kill = false, > }; > struct mem_cgroup *iter; > unsigned long chosen_points = 0; > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > @@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ enum oom_scan_t oom_scan_process_thread(struct oom_control *oc, > * Don't allow any other task to have access to the reserves. > */ > if (test_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_MEMDIE)) { > - if (!oc->force_kill) > + if (oc->order != -1) > return OOM_SCAN_ABORT; > } > if (!task->mm) > @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ enum oom_scan_t oom_scan_process_thread(struct oom_control *oc, > if (oom_task_origin(task)) > return OOM_SCAN_SELECT; > > - if (task_will_free_mem(task) && !oc->force_kill) > + if (task_will_free_mem(task) && oc->order != -1) > return OOM_SCAN_ABORT; > > return OOM_SCAN_OK; > @@ -718,7 +718,6 @@ void pagefault_out_of_memory(void) > .nodemask = NULL, > .gfp_mask = 0, > .order = 0, > - .force_kill = false, > }; > > if (mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize(true)) > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > @@ -2685,7 +2685,6 @@ __alloc_pages_may_oom(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, > .nodemask = ac->nodemask, > .gfp_mask = gfp_mask, > .order = order, > - .force_kill = false, > }; > struct page *page; > -- 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/