Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756244AbZDVUM0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:12:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754185AbZDVUMI (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:12:08 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:36175 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754835AbZDVUMG (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:12:06 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [Bug #13058] First hibernation attempt fails Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:11:17 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.2 (Linux/2.6.30-rc2-rjw; KDE/4.2.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Andrew Morton , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org References: <20090420163734.b8e24fc9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090422130705.GA16186@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20090422130705.GA16186@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200904222211.18221.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1336 Lines: 34 On Wednesday 22 April 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > Of course, this will protect the calling task from getting oom-killed. > > But it doesn't protect other tasks from getting oom-killed due to the > > activity of _this_ task. > > > > But I think that problem already exists, and that this proposal doesn't > > worsen anything, yes? > > > > Or is it the case that all other tasks are safely stuck in the freezer > > at this time, so they won't be allocating any memory anyway? > > That is the idea, yes. ... but we now have more threads that are not > freezable... so they may allocate the memory. > > Is it non-feasible to free memory without really going and allocating > everything? The question is whether there is a point. In principle we can just go and allocate as much as we need upfront. It shouldn't change anything, because we resume and suspend devices after creating the image anyway. I think we could try to disable the OOM killer before suspend and just allocate the memory for the image right before devices are suspended for the first time. Thanks, Rafael -- 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/