Hi William, On 12/03, William Dauchy wrote: > > I was wondering if this patch was also targeted for stable branch?
Unlikely... but we will see. > Before this patch, I was testing this one > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/13/336 perhaps this patch makes more sense for stable. But, to clarify just in case, it is not needed after this series. > which is fixing my oom issues. Yes, but it doesn't fix all problems even in mm/oom_kill.c, and we need to fix while_each_thread() anyway. > I applied the two patches on top of a 3.10.x and got some tasks > stalled after the first OOM: So you are saying that this was introduced by this series? Could you retest with the recent kernel? > INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 21, > t=15014 jiffies, g=65569, c=65568, q=6537) This series does not expand the rcu-locked sections except: it adds rcu_read_lock() into has_intersects_mems_allowed() but this is the obvious bugfix. So far I _think_ that this series should not be blamed for that, but I'll try to recheck. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
