Re: [RFC][-mm][PATCH 0/6] oom-killer: total renewal

KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-03T23:58:46Z

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:34:13 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>
> > Hi, as discussed in "Memory overcommit" threads, I started rewrite.
> >
> > This is just for showing "I started" (not just chating or sleeping ;)
> >
> > All implemtations are not fixed yet. So feel free to do any comments.
> > This set is for minimum change set, I think. Some more rich functions
> > can be implemented based on this.
> >
> > All patches are against "mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2009-11-01-10-01"
> >
> > Patches are organized as
> >
> > (1) pass oom-killer more information, classification and fix mempolicy case.
> > (2) counting swap usage
> > (3) counting lowmem usage
> > (4) fork bomb detector/killer
> > (5) check expansion of total_vm
> > (6) rewrite __badness().
> >
> > passed small tests on x86-64 boxes.
> >
>
> Thanks for looking into improving the oom killer!
>
Thank you for review.

> I think it would be easier to merge the four different concepts you have
> here:
>
> - counting for swap usage (patch 2),
>
> - oom killer constraint reorganization (patches 1 and 3),
>
> - fork bomb detector (patch 4), and
>
> - heuristic changes (patches 5 and 6)
>
> into seperate patchsets and get them merged one at a time.

yes, I will do so. I think we share total view of final image.

> I think patch 2 can easily be merged into -mm now, and patches 1 and 3 could
> be merged after cleaned up.
ok, maybe patch 1 should be separated more.

>We'll probably need more discussion on the rest.
>
agreed.

> Patches 1 and 6 have whitespace damage, btw.
Oh, will fix.

Thanks,
-Kame