Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 2:13 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 08-12-17 10:06:26, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa >> wrote: >> > Michal Hocko wrote: >> >> On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote:

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 2:13 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 08-12-17 10:06:26, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa >> wrote: >> > Michal Hocko wrote: >> >> On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >> >> > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: >> >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa >> wrote: >> >> > >> This change checks for pending >> >> > >> fatal signals inside shrink_slab

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa >> wrote: >> >> > >> This change checks for pending >> >> > >> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected >> >> > >> terminates this loop early. >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Michal Hocko wrote: > > > I agree that making waits/loops killable is generally good. But be sure > > > to be > > > prepared for the worst case. For example, start __GFP_KILLABLE from "best > > > effort" > > > basis (i.e. no guarantee that the allocating thread will leave the page > > >

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Michal Hocko wrote: > > > I agree that making waits/loops killable is generally good. But be sure > > > to be > > > prepared for the worst case. For example, start __GFP_KILLABLE from "best > > > effort" > > > basis (i.e. no guarantee that the allocating thread will leave the page > > >

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Sat 09-12-17 17:08:42, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa > > wrote: > > >> > >> This change checks for pending > > >> > >> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected > > >> > >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Sat 09-12-17 17:08:42, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa > > wrote: > > >> > >> This change checks for pending > > >> > >> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected > > >> > >> terminates this loop early. > > >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri 08-12-17 10:06:26, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa > wrote: > > Michal Hocko wrote: > >> On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > >> > > On Thu 07-12-17

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri 08-12-17 10:06:26, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa > wrote: > > Michal Hocko wrote: > >> On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > >> > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On 2017/12/09 6:02, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal >> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process >> since it will

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On 2017/12/09 6:02, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal >> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process >> since it will

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa > wrote: > >> > >> This change checks for pending > >> > >> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected > >> > >> terminates this loop early. > >> > > > >> > > This

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa > wrote: > >> > >> This change checks for pending > >> > >> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected > >> > >> terminates this loop early. > >> > > > >> > > This changelog doesn't really address my

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:02 PM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal >> signal is pending there is no point in

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:02 PM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal >> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process > since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process > since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: >> On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >> > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> > >> Slab shrinkers can be

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: >> On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >> > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > > >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > > >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > >> signal is pending

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Fri 08-12-17 20:36:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > >> signal is pending

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal >> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process >> since it

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On 2017/12/08 17:22, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: >> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal >> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal >> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process >> since it

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process > since it will be killed anyway. The thing is that we are

Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

On Thu 07-12-17 17:23:05, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process > since it will be killed anyway. The thing is that we are

[PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is

[PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is