From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: oom_kill: revert 3% system memory bonus for privileged tasks
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:05:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140124040531.GF4407@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401212050340.8512@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 08:53:07PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > > Unfortunately, I think this could potentially be too much of a bonus. On
> > > your same 32GB machine, if a root process is using 18GB and a user process
> > > is using 14GB, the user process ends up getting selected while the current
> > > discount of 3% still selects the root process.
> > >
> > > I do like the idea of scaling this bonus depending on points, however. I
> > > think it would be better if we could scale the discount but also limit it
> > > to some sane value.
> >
> > I just reverted to the /= 4 because we had that for a long time and it
> > seemed to work. I don't really mind either way as long as we get rid
> > of that -3%. Do you have a suggestion?
> >
>
> How about simply using 3% of the root process's points so that root
> processes get some bonus compared to non-root processes with the same
> memory usage and it's scaled to the usage rather than amount of available
> memory?
>
> So rather than points /= 4, we do
>
> if (has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> points -= (points * 3) / 100;
>
> instead. Sound good?
Yes, should be okay.
Do you want to send a patch? Want me to update mine?
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: oom_kill: revert 3% system memory bonus for privileged tasks
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:05:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140124040531.GF4407@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401212050340.8512@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 08:53:07PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > > Unfortunately, I think this could potentially be too much of a bonus. On
> > > your same 32GB machine, if a root process is using 18GB and a user process
> > > is using 14GB, the user process ends up getting selected while the current
> > > discount of 3% still selects the root process.
> > >
> > > I do like the idea of scaling this bonus depending on points, however. I
> > > think it would be better if we could scale the discount but also limit it
> > > to some sane value.
> >
> > I just reverted to the /= 4 because we had that for a long time and it
> > seemed to work. I don't really mind either way as long as we get rid
> > of that -3%. Do you have a suggestion?
> >
>
> How about simply using 3% of the root process's points so that root
> processes get some bonus compared to non-root processes with the same
> memory usage and it's scaled to the usage rather than amount of available
> memory?
>
> So rather than points /= 4, we do
>
> if (has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> points -= (points * 3) / 100;
>
> instead. Sound good?
Yes, should be okay.
Do you want to send a patch? Want me to update mine?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-24 4:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-15 23:43 [patch] mm: oom_kill: revert 3% system memory bonus for privileged tasks Johannes Weiner
2014-01-15 23:43 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-16 0:18 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-16 0:18 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-16 7:07 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-16 7:07 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-22 4:53 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-22 4:53 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-24 4:05 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2014-01-24 4:05 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-26 3:48 ` [patch] mm, oom: base root bonus on current usage David Rientjes
2014-01-26 3:48 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-26 15:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-26 15:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-29 20:28 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-29 20:28 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-30 0:35 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-30 0:35 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-30 2:12 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-30 2:12 ` Johannes Weiner
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=20140124040531.GF4407@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--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.