Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-30 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/30, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > David Rientjes wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > > > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > > > false-negative; SIGKILL can be

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-30 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/29, David Rientjes wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > > false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. > > > > And

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-30 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/30, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > David Rientjes wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > > > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > > > false-negative; SIGKILL can be

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-30 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/29, David Rientjes wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > > false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. > > > > And

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-29 Thread Tetsuo Handa
David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > > false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. > > > > And worse, it can

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-29 Thread David Rientjes
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. > > And worse, it can be false-positive due to exec or

[PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-29 Thread Oleg Nesterov
The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. And worse, it can be false-positive due to exec or coredump. exec is mostly fine, but coredump is not. It is

[PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-29 Thread Oleg Nesterov
The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. And worse, it can be false-positive due to exec or coredump. exec is mostly fine, but coredump is not. It is

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-29 Thread David Rientjes
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. > > And worse, it can be false-positive due to exec or

Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending()

2015-09-29 Thread Tetsuo Handa
David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > The fatal_signal_pending() was added to suppress unnecessary "sharing > > same memory" message, but it can't 100% help anyway because it can be > > false-negative; SIGKILL can be already dequeued. > > > > And worse, it can