From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: minchan.kim@gmail.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, caiqian@redhat.com,
rientjes@google.com, hughd@google.com,
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] oom: don't kill random process
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:49:31 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DDB711B.8010408@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinKm=m8zdPGN0Trpy4HtEFyxMYzPA@mail.gmail.com>
(2011/05/24 17:46), Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:53 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * chosen_point==1 may be a sign that root privilege bonus is too
>>>> large
>>>> + * and we choose wrong task. Let's recalculate oom score without
>>>> the
>>>> + * dubious bonus.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (protect_root&& (chosen_points == 1)) {
>>>> + protect_root = 0;
>>>> + goto retry;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> The idea is good to me.
>>> But once we meet it, should we give up protecting root privileged
>>> processes?
>>> How about decaying bonus point?
>>
>> After applying my patch, unprivileged process never get score-1. (note,
>> mapping
>> anon pages naturally makes to increase nr_ptes)
>
> Hmm, If I understand your code correctly, unprivileged process can get
> a score 1 by 3% bonus.
3% bonus is for privileged process. :)
> So after all, we can get a chosen_point with 1.
> Why I get a chosen_point with 1 is as bonus is rather big, I think.
> So I would like to use small bonus than first iteration(ie, decay bonus).
>
>>
>> Then, decaying don't make any accuracy. Am I missing something?
>
> Maybe I miss something. :(
>
>
>
>
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-24 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-20 8:00 [PATCH v2 0/5] Fix oom killer doesn't work at all if system have > gigabytes memory (aka CAI founded issue) KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-20 8:01 ` [PATCH 1/5] oom: improve dump_tasks() show items KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-23 22:16 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-20 8:02 ` [PATCH 2/5] oom: kill younger process first KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-23 2:37 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-23 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-20 8:03 ` [PATCH 3/5] oom: oom-killer don't use proportion of system-ram internally KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-23 3:59 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-24 1:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 1:32 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-23 4:02 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-24 1:44 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 3:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-23 22:28 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-23 22:48 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-24 1:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 8:32 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-26 7:08 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-27 19:12 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-24 2:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-26 9:34 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-26 9:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-20 8:04 ` [PATCH 4/5] oom: don't kill random process KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-23 4:31 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-24 1:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 8:46 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-24 8:49 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2011-05-24 9:04 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-24 9:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 9:20 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-24 9:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-23 22:32 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-24 1:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 1:39 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-24 1:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-24 1:58 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-24 2:03 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-25 23:50 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-30 1:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 4:48 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-31 4:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-20 8:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] oom: merge oom_kill_process() with oom_kill_task() KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 1:33 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Fix oom killer doesn't work at all if system have > gigabytes memory (aka CAI founded issue) CAI Qian
2011-05-31 4:10 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 4:14 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-31 4:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 4:49 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 4:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 4:52 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-31 7:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 7:50 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-31 7:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 7:59 ` CAI Qian
2011-05-31 8:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 10:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-01 1:17 ` CAI Qian
2011-06-01 3:32 ` Minchan Kim
2011-06-06 3:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-06 14:44 ` Minchan Kim
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=4DDB711B.8010408@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=caiqian@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).