From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: zhongjinji@honor.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
rientjes@google.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, npache@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, dvhart@infradead.org,
dave@stgolabs.net, andrealmeid@igalia.com, liulu.liu@honor.com,
feng.han@honor.com
Subject: Re: [[PATCH v2] 2/2] futex: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futex
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 07:52:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJBKijr1nR1CleBL@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250801153649.23244-2-zhongjinji@honor.com>
On Fri 01-08-25 23:36:49, zhongjinji@honor.com wrote:
> From: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com>
>
> After merging the patch
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220414144042.677008-1-npache@redhat.com/T/#u,
> the OOM reaper runs less frequently because many processes exit within 2 seconds.
>
> However, when a process is killed, timely handling by the OOM reaper allows
> its memory to be freed faster.
>
> Since relatively few processes use robust futex, delaying the OOM reaper for
> all processes is undesirable, as many killed processes cannot release memory
> more quickly.
Could you elaborate more about why this is really needed? OOM should be
a very slow path. Why do you care about this potential improvement in
that situation? In other words what is the usecase?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-04 5:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-01 15:36 [[PATCH v2] 1/2] futex: Add check_robust_futex to verify process usage of robust_futex zhongjinji
2025-08-01 15:36 ` [[PATCH v2] 2/2] futex: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futex zhongjinji
2025-08-04 5:52 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2025-08-04 11:50 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-04 12:01 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-05 6:18 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-05 14:55 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-05 13:19 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-05 16:02 ` [[PATCH v2] 1/2] futex: Add check_robust_futex to verify process usage of robust_futex Thomas Gleixner
2025-08-12 13:21 ` zhongjinji
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=aJBKijr1nR1CleBL@tiehlicka \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=feng.han@honor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liulu.liu@honor.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zhongjinji@honor.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.