On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.cz> wrote: > This patch builds on top of Cong Wang's. What do you think?
I think it is should a preliminary of my patch, not a followup. I can carry this patch for you if you want. > --- > From cdf97a20b107ee584352f07274a88d7c3f014ab2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.cz> > Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:52:30 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] OOM, PM: OOM killed task cannot escape PM suspend > > PM freezer relies on having all tasks frozen by the time devices are > getting frozen so that no task will touch them while they are getting > frozen. But OOM killer is allowed to kill an already frozen task in > order to handle OOM situtation. In order to protect from late wake ups > OOM killer is disabled after all tasks are frozen. This, however, still > keeps an window open when a killed task didn't manage to die by the time > freeze_processes finishes. Fix this by checking all tasks after OOM > killer has been disabled. To prevent from useless check also introduce > and check oom_kills count which gets incremented when a task is killed > by OOM killer. All the tasks have to be checked only if the counter > changes. Not sure if I understand your patch correctly, seems you are checking if there is any ongoing OOM killer during PM suspend, since oom_kills will always increase, maybe a seqlock is more clear? Or you mean totally forbid PM suspend when an OOM killer is ongoing? If so, you should call atomic_dec() after OOM is done. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/