Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm, oom: do not grant oom victims full memory reserves access

[Roman Gushchin]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:16:44PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 27-07-17 11:03:55, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi,
> > this is a part of a larger series I posted back in Oct last year [1]. I
> > have dropped patch 3 because it was incorrect and patch 4 is not
> > applicable without it.
> > 
> > The primary reason to apply patch 1 is to remove a risk of the complete
> > memory depletion by oom victims. While this is a theoretical risk right
> > now there is a demand for memcg aware oom killer which might kill all
> > processes inside a memcg which can be a lot of tasks. That would make
> > the risk quite real.
> > 
> > This issue is addressed by limiting access to memory reserves. We no
> > longer use TIF_MEMDIE to grant the access and use tsk_is_oom_victim
> > instead. See Patch 1 for more details. Patch 2 is a trivial follow up
> > cleanup.
> 
> Any comments, concerns? Can we merge it?

I've rebased the cgroup-aware OOM killer and ran some tests.
Everything works well.

Thanks!