Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Exclude TIF_MEMDIE processes from candidates.

2016-01-07 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 07-01-16 15:58:41, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 07-01-16 22:31:32, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > [...] > > I think we need to filter at select_bad_process() and oom_kill_process(). > > > > When P has no children, P is chosen and TIF_MEMDIE is set on P. But P can > > be chosen forever due to P->sign

Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Exclude TIF_MEMDIE processes from candidates.

2016-01-07 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 07-01-16 22:31:32, Tetsuo Handa wrote: [...] > I think we need to filter at select_bad_process() and oom_kill_process(). > > When P has no children, P is chosen and TIF_MEMDIE is set on P. But P can > be chosen forever due to P->signal->oom_score_adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MAX > even if the OOM r

Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Exclude TIF_MEMDIE processes from candidates.

2016-01-07 Thread Tetsuo Handa
Michal Hocko wrote: > I do not think the placement in find_lock_task_mm is desirable nor > correct. This function is used in multiple contexts outside of the oom > proper. It only returns a locked task_struct for a thread that belongs > to the process. OK. Andrew, please drop from -mm tree for now