On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 6:45 PM Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 06:23:07 -0700 Shakeel Butt wrote:
>
> > > Here is a patch to use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS.
> > >
> > > From 415e52cf55bc4ad931e4f005421b827f0b02693d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: Tetsuo Handa
> > > Date: Mon, 17 Jun
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 06:23:07 -0700 Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > Here is a patch to use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS.
> >
> > From 415e52cf55bc4ad931e4f005421b827f0b02693d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Tetsuo Handa
> > Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 00:09:38 +0900
> > Subject: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: Use
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 8:14 AM Tetsuo Handa
wrote:
>
> On 2019/06/16 16:37, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > On 2019/06/16 6:33, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >> On 2019/06/16 3:50, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> While dump_tasks() traverses only each thread group,
> mem_cgroup_scan_tasks()
> traverses
On Mon 17-06-19 18:56:47, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/06/17 15:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Sat 15-06-19 09:11:37, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> >>> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> >>> index 5a58778c91d4..43eb479a5dc7
On 2019/06/17 15:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 15-06-19 09:11:37, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
>>> index 5a58778c91d4..43eb479a5dc7 100644
>>> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
>>> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
>>> @@
On Sat 15-06-19 09:11:37, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> > index 5a58778c91d4..43eb479a5dc7 100644
> > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> > @@ -161,8 +161,8 @@ static bool
On Mon 17-06-19 00:13:47, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[...]
> >From 415e52cf55bc4ad931e4f005421b827f0b02693d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa
> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 00:09:38 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: Use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS at
> mem_cgroup_scan_tasks().
>
> Since commit
On 2019/06/16 16:37, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/06/16 6:33, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> On 2019/06/16 3:50, Shakeel Butt wrote:
While dump_tasks() traverses only each thread group,
mem_cgroup_scan_tasks()
traverses each thread.
>>>
>>> I think mem_cgroup_scan_tasks() traversing
On 2019/06/16 6:33, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/06/16 3:50, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>>> While dump_tasks() traverses only each thread group, mem_cgroup_scan_tasks()
>>> traverses each thread.
>>
>> I think mem_cgroup_scan_tasks() traversing threads is not intentional
>> and css_task_iter_start in it
On 2019/06/16 3:50, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>> While dump_tasks() traverses only each thread group, mem_cgroup_scan_tasks()
>> traverses each thread.
>
> I think mem_cgroup_scan_tasks() traversing threads is not intentional
> and css_task_iter_start in it should use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS as the
> oom
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:49 AM Tetsuo Handa
wrote:
>
> On 2019/06/16 1:11, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> >> index 5a58778c91d4..43eb479a5dc7 100644
> >> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> >> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
>
On 2019/06/16 1:11, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
>> index 5a58778c91d4..43eb479a5dc7 100644
>> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
>> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
>> @@ -161,8 +161,8 @@ static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Fri 14-06-19 20:15:31, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:08 PM syzbot
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > syzbot found the following crash on:
> > >
> > > HEAD commit:3f310e51 Add linux-next specific files for
On 2019/06/15 10:10, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> I'm not sure this patch is correct/safe. Can you try memcg OOM torture
> test (including memcg group OOM killing enabled) with this patch applied?
Well, I guess this patch was wrong. The ordering of removing threads
does not matter as long as we start
On Fri 14-06-19 20:15:31, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:08 PM syzbot
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following crash on:
> >
> > HEAD commit:3f310e51 Add linux-next specific files for 20190607
> > git tree: linux-next
> > console output:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:08 PM syzbot
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> syzbot found the following crash on:
>
> HEAD commit:3f310e51 Add linux-next specific files for 20190607
> git tree: linux-next
> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=15ab8771a0
> kernel config:
I'm not sure this patch is correct/safe. Can you try memcg OOM torture
test (including memcg group OOM killing enabled) with this patch applied?
>From a436624c73d106fad9b880a6cef5abd83b2329a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tetsuo Handa
Date: Sat, 15 Jun
Hello,
syzbot found the following crash on:
HEAD commit:3f310e51 Add linux-next specific files for 20190607
git tree: linux-next
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=15ab8771a0
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=5d176e1849bbc45
dashboard
18 matches
Mail list logo
