linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, andrealmeid@igalia.com,
	dave@stgolabs.net, dvhart@infradead.org, feng.han@honor.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	liulu.liu@honor.com, mingo@redhat.com, npache@redhat.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, rientjes@google.com,
	shakeel.butt@linux.dev, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [[PATCH v2] 2/2] futex: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futex
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 14:01:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJChI-LMwmuWEwpH@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250804115037.19690-1-zhongjinji@honor.com>

On Mon 04-08-25 19:50:37, zhongjinji wrote:
> >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?
> 
> Well, We are using the cgroup v1 freezer. When a frozen process is
> killed, it cannot exit immediately and is blocked in __refrigerator until
> it is thawed. When the process cannot be thawed in time, it will result in 
> increased system memory pressure.

This is an important information to be part of the changelog! It is also
important to note why don't you care about processes that have robust
mutexes. Is this purely a probabilistic improvement because those are
less common?

TBH I find this to be really hackish and justification based on cgroup
v1 (which is considered legacy) doesn't make it particularly appealing.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-04 12:01 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
2025-08-04 11:50     ` zhongjinji
2025-08-04 12:01       ` Michal Hocko [this message]
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=aJChI-LMwmuWEwpH@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 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).