From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7F7CC3A5A6 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 20:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9949822CF8 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 20:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=lca.pw header.i=@lca.pw header.b="G7R57zwJ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9949822CF8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lca.pw Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2F80E6B0008; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:19:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 2A9986B000C; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:19:01 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 1BF5C6B000D; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:19:01 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0194.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.194]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDC396B0008 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:19:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin07.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 839938E4A for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 20:19:00 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75872950440.07.error67_4e9254f86c128 X-HE-Tag: error67_4e9254f86c128 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4404 Received: from mail-qt1-f195.google.com (mail-qt1-f195.google.com [209.85.160.195]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 20:18:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt1-f195.google.com with SMTP id k13so1008681qtm.12 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 13:18:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lca.pw; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XtILyRH8l1LUvlvqjqN9r44tpqWCdmlEVajO5M2YwAs=; b=G7R57zwJime+xE+GzBWwJdF//H/oggEzvdCGb3Sm4QSKceQy4xJX36dlajnviEjIGY /Chz/Rqpb5TC9IompxAZv9cado+gjUgTNZfirxP6v5BslLLntwCQow/9oG4Fm/QR98tg W4eaEhkxGKBgQ7AELZ0p4EzBvy4FOsHKiXM1dAnNwNEncsrHwFFx5/DTvDQeEQH+wp/v hOQkrZigJB9531ETS0wPZGkGtmmNhxJxJ0Wd1Aad/xmc9Uzq2ApiBfSRMnR3XDyyBypt rhrVvxGhjNTN40Dpka29XdZu6T6xiCodQVec33YIAyWksfo69xBlStCwi4LJcslcoo4V qJ2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XtILyRH8l1LUvlvqjqN9r44tpqWCdmlEVajO5M2YwAs=; b=M/GXKCRc1tosx091CUqgeNvq6QXaFlIqUfn0hLx6WLao8QkoASo0NcCxDfybrlD/pn IQkZCqogfEoDjmVAK+xoj3tJP6t+sb01dhzo8X7Y69GKRXK8OAnP1B/oukV0pBxRx89t MkrKHhziNuQZ2LzSjCUgwvx9vjd8LutxLUjF0YxlHxbkyeFlq805beBtBl5yTZTKswi0 j+2CsCMtIoxHUVOy1kED5wpPE0sJAdzTz+fGvhqYY4wse2/93dczlp92AfjKRsTK4EyF 9e3rwzPIC4rA4QkBGcQUw/eqfAzDeqRMHJ8L3/ihH/QSuE6zPa6qsUPAHeeL102a/jsC rYQg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUg/GEOB/xZoEG7iu66O4loqwo2VWGFbQrynVZqbKcfKkRmYDAy k2Q1ginphJRFmEWFM273Q2Zsdg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzU7b7B+zUOBiS4wMS8VdYSMLF+ly4yTg2sy8ZcKePkRh6wzfscOlpeKWtoEIcjRXIAfVUdzw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:1241:: with SMTP id g1mr6305448qtj.145.1567023539198; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 13:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-41-57.bos.redhat.com (nat-pool-bos-t.redhat.com. [66.187.233.206]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n62sm91932qkd.124.2019.08.28.13.18.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Aug 2019 13:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1567023536.5576.19.camel@lca.pw> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] OOM Debug print selection and additional information From: Qian Cai To: Edward Chron , Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , Johannes Weiner , David Rientjes , Tetsuo Handa , Shakeel Butt , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ivan Delalande Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:18:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <20190826193638.6638-1-echron@arista.com> <20190827071523.GR7538@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190828065955.GB7386@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 (3.22.6-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 12:46 -0700, Edward Chron wrote: > But with the caveat that running a eBPF script that it isn't standard L= inux > operating procedure, at this point in time any way will not be well > received in the data center. Can't you get your eBPF scripts into the BCC project? As far I can tell, = the BCC has been included in several distros already, and then it will become a p= art of standard linux toolkits. >=20 > Our belief is if you really think eBPF is the preferred mechanism > then move OOM reporting to an eBPF.=C2=A0 > I mentioned this before but I will reiterate this here. On the other hand, it seems many people are happy with the simple kernel = OOM report we have here. Not saying the current situation is perfect. On the = top of that, some people are using kdump, and some people have resource monitori= ng to warn about potential memory overcommits before OOM kicks in etc.