From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933240AbcFIGqk (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jun 2016 02:46:40 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]:38576 "EHLO mail-wm0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751174AbcFIGqi (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jun 2016 02:46:38 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 08:46:35 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Oleg Nesterov , linux-mm@kvack.org, Tetsuo Handa , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] mm, oom: kill all tasks sharing the mm Message-ID: <20160609064634.GC24777@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1464945404-30157-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1464945404-30157-7-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <20160606232007.GA624@redhat.com> <20160608062219.GA22570@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 08-06-16 15:51:20, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > Why is the patch asking users to report oom killing of a process that > > > raced with setting /proc/pid/oom_score_adj to OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN? What is > > > possibly actionable about it? > > > > Well, the primary point is to know whether such races happen in the real > > loads and whether they actually matter. If yes we can harden the locking > > or come up with a less racy solutions. > > A thread being set to oom disabled while racing with the oom killer > obviously isn't a concern: it could very well be set to oom disabled after > the SIGKILL is sent and before the signal is handled, and that's not even > fixable without unneeded complexity because we don't know the source of > the SIGKILL. Please remove the printk entirely. OK, if you find it more confusing than useful I will not insist. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs