On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:02 AM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:44 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 05-11-20 09:21:13, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:16 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu 05-11-20 08:50:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:44 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 05-11-20 09:21:13, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:16 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu 05-11-20 08:50:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > >
>
On Thu 05-11-20 09:21:13, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:16 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 05-11-20 08:50:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > On W
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 09:21:13AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:16 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 05-11-20 08:50:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:16 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 05-11-20 08:50:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:58:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
On Thu 05-11-20 08:50:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:58:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Tue 03-11-20 13:32:28, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, N
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:50:58AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:58:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Tue 03-11-20 13:32:28, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:58:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 03-11-20 13:32:28, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > O
On Wed 04-11-20 12:40:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:58:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 03-11-20 13:32:28, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > [...]
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:58:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 03-11-20 13:32:28, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > To follow up on this. Should I post an RFC imp
On Tue 03-11-20 13:32:28, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > [...]
> > > To follow up on this. Should I post an RFC implementing SIGKILL_SYNC
> > > which in addition to sending a kill signal
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:40:41PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 1:32 PM Minchan Kim wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > To follow up on this. Should I
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 1:32 PM Minchan Kim wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > [...]
> > > To follow up on this. Should I post an RFC implementing SIGKILL_SYNC
> > > which in addition to sending a kill
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> [...]
> > To follow up on this. Should I post an RFC implementing SIGKILL_SYNC
> > which in addition to sending a kill signal would also reap the
> > victim's mm in the context of t
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 1:35 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> [...]
> > To follow up on this. Should I post an RFC implementing SIGKILL_SYNC
> > which in addition to sending a kill signal would also reap the
> > victim's mm in the context of the calle
On Mon 02-11-20 12:29:24, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
[...]
> To follow up on this. Should I post an RFC implementing SIGKILL_SYNC
> which in addition to sending a kill signal would also reap the
> victim's mm in the context of the caller? Maybe having some code will
> get the discussion moving forwa
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:25 PM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 14-10-20 09:57:20, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 5:09 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > > > The need is similar to why oom-reaper was
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:43 AM Minchan Kim wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:20:30AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > > I do have a vague recollection that we have discussed a kill(2) based
> > > > approach as well in the past. Essentially SIG_KILL_SYNC which would
> > > > not only send th
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:20 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Wed 14-10-20 09:57:20, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 5:09 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > The need is similar to why oom-reaper was introduced - when a process
> > > > > is being killed to free memory we w
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:20:30AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > I do have a vague recollection that we have discussed a kill(2) based
> > > approach as well in the past. Essentially SIG_KILL_SYNC which would
> > > not only send the signal but it would start a teardown of resources
> > > owned
On Wed 14-10-20 09:57:20, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 5:09 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > > > The need is similar to why oom-reaper was introduced - when a process
> > > > is being killed to free memory we want to make sure memory is freed
> > > > even if the victim is in
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:57:20AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 5:09 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > [Sorry for a late reply]
> >
> > On Mon 14-09-20 17:45:44, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > + linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:43 PM Su
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 5:09 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> [Sorry for a late reply]
>
> On Mon 14-09-20 17:45:44, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > + linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:43 PM Suren Baghdasaryan
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Last year I sent an RFC about using oom-re
[Sorry for a late reply]
On Mon 14-09-20 17:45:44, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> + linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:43 PM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> >
> > Last year I sent an RFC about using oom-reaper while killing a
> > process: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10894
+ linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:43 PM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>
> Last year I sent an RFC about using oom-reaper while killing a
> process: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10894999. During LSFMM2019
> discussion https://lwn.net/Articles/787217 a couple of alternative
25 matches
Mail list logo