From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Martin Bligh <mbligh@mbligh.org>
Cc: marcelo@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
drepper@redhat.com, riel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: OOM notifications
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:11:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071026141112.18af0fa6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <472256AB.6060109@mbligh.org>
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:05:47 -0700
Martin Bligh <mbligh@mbligh.org> wrote:
> > Martin was talking about some mad scheme wherin you'd create a bunch of
> > pseudo files (say, /proc/foo/0, /proc/foo/1, ..., /proc/foo/9) and each one
> > would become "ready" when the MM scanning priority reaches 10%, 20%, ...
> > 100%.
> >
> > Obviously there would need to be a lot of abstraction to unhook a permanent
> > userspace feature from a transient kernel implementation, but the basic
> > idea is that a process which wants to know when the VM is getting into the
> > orange zone would select() on the file "7" and a process which wants to
> > know when the VM is getting into the red zone would select on file "9".
> >
> > It get more complicated with NUMA memory nodes and cgroup memory
> > controllers.
>
> We ended up not doing that, but making a scanner that saw what
> percentage of the LRU was touched in the last n seconds, and
> printing that to userspace to deal with.
>
> Turns out priority is a horrible metric to use for this - it
> stays at default for ages, then falls off a cliff far too
> quickly to react to.
Sure, but in terms of high-level userspace interface, being able to
select() on a group of priority buckets (spread across different nodes,
zones and cgroups) seems a lot more flexible than any signal-based
approach we could come up with.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Martin Bligh <mbligh@mbligh.org>
Cc: marcelo@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
drepper@redhat.com, riel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: OOM notifications
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:11:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071026141112.18af0fa6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <472256AB.6060109@mbligh.org>
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:05:47 -0700
Martin Bligh <mbligh@mbligh.org> wrote:
> > Martin was talking about some mad scheme wherin you'd create a bunch of
> > pseudo files (say, /proc/foo/0, /proc/foo/1, ..., /proc/foo/9) and each one
> > would become "ready" when the MM scanning priority reaches 10%, 20%, ...
> > 100%.
> >
> > Obviously there would need to be a lot of abstraction to unhook a permanent
> > userspace feature from a transient kernel implementation, but the basic
> > idea is that a process which wants to know when the VM is getting into the
> > orange zone would select() on the file "7" and a process which wants to
> > know when the VM is getting into the red zone would select on file "9".
> >
> > It get more complicated with NUMA memory nodes and cgroup memory
> > controllers.
>
> We ended up not doing that, but making a scanner that saw what
> percentage of the LRU was touched in the last n seconds, and
> printing that to userspace to deal with.
>
> Turns out priority is a horrible metric to use for this - it
> stays at default for ages, then falls off a cliff far too
> quickly to react to.
Sure, but in terms of high-level userspace interface, being able to
select() on a group of priority buckets (spread across different nodes,
zones and cgroups) seems a lot more flexible than any signal-based
approach we could come up with.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-26 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-18 20:15 OOM notifications Marcelo Tosatti
2007-10-26 21:02 ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-26 21:02 ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-26 21:05 ` Martin Bligh
2007-10-26 21:05 ` Martin Bligh
2007-10-26 21:11 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-10-26 21:11 ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-26 21:35 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-26 21:35 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-26 21:59 ` Martin Bligh
2007-10-26 21:59 ` Martin Bligh
2007-10-26 22:30 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-26 22:30 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-28 21:16 ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-28 21:16 ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-30 14:57 ` Jan Kara
2007-10-30 15:23 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-30 15:55 ` Jan Kara
2007-10-30 17:31 ` Rik van Riel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-10-18 20:25 Marcelo Tosatti
2007-10-18 20:38 ` Rene Herman
2007-10-18 20:52 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-18 21:06 ` Rene Herman
2007-10-18 21:18 ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-18 22:01 ` Rene Herman
2007-10-18 22:10 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-10-19 5:15 ` Chris Friesen
2007-10-19 10:17 ` Pavel Machek
2007-10-19 15:18 ` Samuel Tardieu
2007-10-19 16:58 ` Chris Friesen
2007-10-18 22:16 ` Rene Herman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071026141112.18af0fa6.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=marcelo@kvack.org \
--cc=mbligh@mbligh.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.