From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752161AbdAMMPl (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 13 Jan 2017 07:15:41 -0500
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36058 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751568AbdAMMPj (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 13 Jan 2017 07:15:39 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 13:15:36 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>, mhocko@suse.com,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: Wait for oom_lock before retrying.
Message-ID: <20170113121536.GK14894@pathway.suse.cz>
References: <201612221927.BGE30207.OSFJMFLFOHQtOV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <20161222134250.GE413@tigerII.localdomain>
 <201612222301.AFG57832.QOFMSVFOJHLOtF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <20161222140930.GF413@tigerII.localdomain>
 <201612261954.FJE69201.OFLVtFJSQFOHMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <20161226113407.GA515@tigerII.localdomain>
 <20170112141844.GA20462@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170113022843.GA9360@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170113110323.GH14894@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170113115024.GA16506@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170113115024.GA16506@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri 2017-01-13 20:50:24, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (01/13/17 12:03), Petr Mladek wrote:
> [..]
> > > why can't we?
> > 
> > Because it would newer call cond_resched() in non-preemptive kernel
> > with CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT disabled. IMHO, we want to call it,
> > for example, when we scroll the entire screen from tty_operations.
> > 
> > Or do I miss anything?
> 
> so... basically. it has never called cond_resched() there. right?
> why is this suddenly a problem now?

But it called cond_resched() when the very same code was called
from tty operations under console_lock() that forced
console_may_schedule = 1;

It will never call cond_resched() from the tty operations
when CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT is disabled and we try to detect
the preemption automatically.

Best Regards,
Petr