From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/23] mm: allow specifying custom oom constraint for BPF triggers
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 10:31:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aRGw6sSyoJiyXb8i@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251027232206.473085-4-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
On Mon 27-10-25 16:21:57, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Currently there is a hard-coded list of possible oom constraints:
> NONE, CPUSET, MEMORY_POLICY & MEMCG. Add a new one: CONSTRAINT_BPF.
> Also, add an ability to specify a custom constraint name
> when calling bpf_out_of_memory(). If an empty string is passed
> as an argument, CONSTRAINT_BPF is displayed.
Constrain is meant to define the scope of the oom handler but to me it
seems like you want to specify the oom handler and (ab)using scope for
that. In other words it still makes sense to distinguesh memcg, global,
mempolicy wide OOMs with global vs. bpf handler, right?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-10 9:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-27 23:21 [PATCH v2 11/23] mm: introduce BPF kfunc to access memory events Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 12/23] bpf: selftests: selftests for memcg stat kfuncs Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 13/23] mm: introduce bpf_out_of_memory() BPF kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 16:43 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-10 9:46 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-11 19:13 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-12 7:50 ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 14/23] mm: allow specifying custom oom constraint for BPF triggers Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 15:58 ` Chris Mason
2025-10-28 16:20 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 16:35 ` Chris Mason
2025-11-10 9:31 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2025-11-11 19:17 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-12 7:52 ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 15/23] mm: introduce bpf_task_is_oom_victim() kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:32 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 18:09 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 18:31 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 16/23] libbpf: introduce bpf_map__attach_struct_ops_opts() Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:07 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:24 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 17/23] bpf: selftests: introduce read_cgroup_file() helper Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 16:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 18/23] bpf: selftests: BPF OOM handler test Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 19/23] sched: psi: refactor psi_trigger_create() Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 20/23] sched: psi: implement bpf_psi struct ops Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:40 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 18:29 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 18:35 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 19:54 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 21/23] sched: psi: implement bpf_psi_create_trigger() kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 22/23] bpf: selftests: add config for psi Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 23/23] bpf: selftests: PSI struct ops test Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:13 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:30 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-10 9:48 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-11 19:03 ` 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=aRGw6sSyoJiyXb8i@tiehlicka \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=inwardvessel@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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).