Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] mm, oom: remove oom_lock from exit_mmap
In-Reply-To: <44d26c25-6e09-49de-5e90-3c16115eb337@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1807162121040.157949@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1807121432370.170100@chino.kir.corp.google.com> <20180713142612.GD19960@dhcp22.suse.cz> <44d26c25-6e09-49de-5e90-3c16115eb337@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 14 Jul 2018, Tetsuo Handa wrote:

> David is making changes using timeout based back off (in linux-next.git)
> which is inappropriately trying to use MMF_UNSTABLE for two purposes.
> 

If you believe there is a problem with the use of MMF_UNSTABLE as it sits 
in -mm, please follow up directly in the thread that proposed the patch.  
I have seen two replies to that thread from you: one that incorporates it 
into your work, and one that links to a verison of my patch in your 
patchset.  I haven't seen a concern raised about the use of MMF_UNSTABLE, 
but perhaps it's somewhere in the 10,000 other emails about the oom 
killer.