From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@suse.cz>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm 1/9 v2] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:14:27 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100216061427.GY5723@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002151417330.26927@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 02:20:01PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> Tasks that do not share the same set of allowed nodes with the task that
> triggered the oom should not be considered as candidates for oom kill.
>
> Tasks in other cpusets with a disjoint set of mems would be unfairly
> penalized otherwise because of oom conditions elsewhere; an extreme
> example could unfairly kill all other applications on the system if a
> single task in a user's cpuset sets itself to OOM_DISABLE and then uses
> more memory than allowed.
>
> Killing tasks outside of current's cpuset rarely would free memory for
> current anyway.
>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 12 +++---------
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(zone_scan_lock);
> /* #define DEBUG */
>
> /*
> - * Is all threads of the target process nodes overlap ours?
> + * Do all threads of the target process overlap our allowed nodes?
> */
> static int has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> @@ -167,14 +167,6 @@ unsigned long badness(struct task_struct *p, unsigned long uptime)
> points /= 4;
>
> /*
> - * If p's nodes don't overlap ours, it may still help to kill p
> - * because p may have allocated or otherwise mapped memory on
> - * this node before. However it will be less likely.
> - */
> - if (!has_intersects_mems_allowed(p))
> - points /= 8;
> -
> - /*
> * Adjust the score by oom_adj.
> */
> if (oom_adj) {
> @@ -266,6 +258,8 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
> continue;
> if (mem && !task_in_mem_cgroup(p, mem))
> continue;
> + if (!has_intersects_mems_allowed(p))
> + continue;
>
> /*
> * This task already has access to memory reserves and is
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@suse.cz>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm 1/9 v2] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:14:27 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100216061427.GY5723@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002151417330.26927@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 02:20:01PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> Tasks that do not share the same set of allowed nodes with the task that
> triggered the oom should not be considered as candidates for oom kill.
>
> Tasks in other cpusets with a disjoint set of mems would be unfairly
> penalized otherwise because of oom conditions elsewhere; an extreme
> example could unfairly kill all other applications on the system if a
> single task in a user's cpuset sets itself to OOM_DISABLE and then uses
> more memory than allowed.
>
> Killing tasks outside of current's cpuset rarely would free memory for
> current anyway.
>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 12 +++---------
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(zone_scan_lock);
> /* #define DEBUG */
>
> /*
> - * Is all threads of the target process nodes overlap ours?
> + * Do all threads of the target process overlap our allowed nodes?
> */
> static int has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> @@ -167,14 +167,6 @@ unsigned long badness(struct task_struct *p, unsigned long uptime)
> points /= 4;
>
> /*
> - * If p's nodes don't overlap ours, it may still help to kill p
> - * because p may have allocated or otherwise mapped memory on
> - * this node before. However it will be less likely.
> - */
> - if (!has_intersects_mems_allowed(p))
> - points /= 8;
> -
> - /*
> * Adjust the score by oom_adj.
> */
> if (oom_adj) {
> @@ -266,6 +258,8 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
> continue;
> if (mem && !task_in_mem_cgroup(p, mem))
> continue;
> + if (!has_intersects_mems_allowed(p))
> + continue;
>
> /*
> * This task already has access to memory reserves and is
--
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:[~2010-02-16 6:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 145+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-15 22:19 [patch -mm 0/9 v2] oom killer rewrite David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:19 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 1/9 v2] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 6:14 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2010-02-16 6:14 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 2/9 v2] oom: sacrifice child with highest badness score for parent David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 6:15 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 6:15 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 3/9 v2] oom: select task from tasklist for mempolicy ooms David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-23 6:31 ` Balbir Singh
2010-02-23 6:31 ` Balbir Singh
2010-02-23 8:17 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-23 8:17 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 4/9 v2] oom: remove compulsory panic_on_oom mode David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 0:00 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 0:00 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 0:14 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 0:14 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 0:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 0:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 9:02 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 9:02 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 23:42 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 23:42 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 23:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 23:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:01 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:01 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:31 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:31 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:41 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:41 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 1:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 1:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 1:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 1:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 2:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 2:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 2:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 2:37 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:37 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:28 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:28 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 2:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 2:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 3:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 3:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 9:11 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 9:11 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 9:52 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-17 9:52 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-17 22:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 22:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-22 5:31 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-02-22 6:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-22 6:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-22 11:42 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-02-22 11:42 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-02-22 20:59 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-22 20:59 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-22 23:51 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-22 23:51 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-22 20:55 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-22 20:55 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 2:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-17 2:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16 6:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 6:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 6:59 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 6:59 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 7:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 7:53 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:53 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 8:08 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 8:08 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 8:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 8:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 8:42 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 8:42 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 5/9 v2] oom: badness heuristic rewrite David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 6/9 v2] oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:28 ` Alan Cox
2010-02-15 22:28 ` Alan Cox
2010-02-15 22:35 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:35 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 7/9 v2] oom: replace sysctls with quick mode David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 6:28 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 6:28 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 8:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 8:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 8/9 v2] oom: avoid oom killer for lowmem allocations David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-15 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 0:10 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 0:10 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 0:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 0:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 1:13 ` [patch] mm: add comment about deprecation of __GFP_NOFAIL David Rientjes
2010-02-16 1:13 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 1:26 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 1:26 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 7:03 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:03 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:23 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 7:23 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 5:32 ` [patch -mm 8/9 v2] oom: avoid oom killer for lowmem allocations KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16 5:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16 7:29 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:29 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 6:44 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 6:44 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 7:41 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:41 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 7:53 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 7:53 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16 8:25 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 8:25 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 23:48 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-16 23:48 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:03 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:03 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-17 0:21 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17 0:21 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-23 11:24 ` Balbir Singh
2010-02-23 11:24 ` Balbir Singh
2010-02-23 21:12 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-23 21:12 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` [patch -mm 9/9 v2] oom: remove unnecessary code and cleanup David Rientjes
2010-02-15 22:20 ` David Rientjes
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=20100216061427.GY5723@laptop \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=l.lunak@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.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.