From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
kernel-team@fb.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v3 5/6] mm, oom: don't mark all oom victims tasks with TIF_MEMDIE
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 14:45:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170629184513.GA27714@castle> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170629085357.GF31603@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:53:57AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 21-06-17 22:19:15, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > We want to limit the number of tasks which are having an access
> > to the memory reserves. To ensure the progress it's enough
> > to have one such process at the time.
> >
> > If we need to kill the whole cgroup, let's give an access to the
> > memory reserves only to the first process in the list, which is
> > (usually) the biggest process.
> > This will give us good chances that all other processes will be able
> > to quit without an access to the memory reserves.
>
> I don't like this to be honest. Is there any reason to go the reduced
> memory reserves access to oom victims I was suggesting earlier [1]?
>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1472723464-22866-2-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org
I've nothing against your approach. What's the state of this patchset?
Do you plan to bring it upstream?
Roman
--
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: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
<kernel-team@fb.com>, <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v3 5/6] mm, oom: don't mark all oom victims tasks with TIF_MEMDIE
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 14:45:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170629184513.GA27714@castle> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170629085357.GF31603@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:53:57AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 21-06-17 22:19:15, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > We want to limit the number of tasks which are having an access
> > to the memory reserves. To ensure the progress it's enough
> > to have one such process at the time.
> >
> > If we need to kill the whole cgroup, let's give an access to the
> > memory reserves only to the first process in the list, which is
> > (usually) the biggest process.
> > This will give us good chances that all other processes will be able
> > to quit without an access to the memory reserves.
>
> I don't like this to be honest. Is there any reason to go the reduced
> memory reserves access to oom victims I was suggesting earlier [1]?
>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1472723464-22866-2-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org
I've nothing against your approach. What's the state of this patchset?
Do you plan to bring it upstream?
Roman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-29 18:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-21 21:19 [v3 0/6] cgroup-aware OOM killer Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` [v3 1/6] mm, oom: use oom_victims counter to synchronize oom victim selection Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` Roman Gushchin
[not found] ` <201706220040.v5M0eSnK074332@www262.sakura.ne.jp>
[not found] ` <201706220040.v5M0eSnK074332-etx+eQDEXHD7nzcFbJAaVXf5DAMn2ifp@public.gmane.org>
2017-06-22 16:58 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-22 16:58 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-22 16:58 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-22 20:37 ` Tetsuo Handa
[not found] ` <201706230537.IDB21366.SQHJVFOOFOMFLt-JPay3/Yim36HaxMnTkn67Xf5DAMn2ifp@public.gmane.org>
2017-06-22 21:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-22 21:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-29 18:47 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-29 18:47 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-29 20:13 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-29 20:13 ` Tetsuo Handa
[not found] ` <1498079956-24467-2-git-send-email-guro-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org>
2017-06-29 9:04 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-29 9:04 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-29 9:04 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-21 21:19 ` [v3 2/6] mm, oom: cgroup-aware OOM killer Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-10 23:05 ` David Rientjes
2017-07-10 23:05 ` David Rientjes
2017-07-11 12:51 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-11 12:51 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-11 12:51 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-11 20:56 ` David Rientjes
2017-07-11 20:56 ` David Rientjes
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.10.1707111342190.60183-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org>
2017-07-12 12:11 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-12 12:11 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-12 12:11 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-07-12 20:26 ` David Rientjes
2017-07-12 20:26 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-21 21:19 ` [v3 3/6] mm, oom: cgroup-aware OOM killer debug info Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` [v3 4/6] mm, oom: introduce oom_score_adj for memory cgroups Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` [v3 5/6] mm, oom: don't mark all oom victims tasks with TIF_MEMDIE Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-29 8:53 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-29 8:53 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-29 18:45 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2017-06-29 18:45 ` Roman Gushchin
2017-06-30 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-30 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-21 21:19 ` [v3 6/6] mm,oom,docs: describe the cgroup-aware OOM killer Roman Gushchin
2017-06-21 21:19 ` Roman Gushchin
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=20170629184513.GA27714@castle \
--to=guro@fb.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.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.