From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:37:57 -0700 From: Paul Jackson Subject: Re: [patch -mm 7/5] oom: filter tasklist dump by mem_cgroup Message-Id: <20070925213757.af33ef01.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: References: <6599ad830709251100n352028beraddaf2ac33ea8f6c@mail.gmail.com> <20070925181442.aeb7b205.pj@sgi.com> <20070925205632.47795637.pj@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: David Rientjes Cc: menage@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, clameter@sgi.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > The OOM killer in -mm no longer checks cpuset_excl_nodes_overlap() to > select an overlapping task and, in fact, that function has been removed > entirely from kernel/cpuset.c. > > If oom_kill_allocating_tasks is zero (which it is by default), the > tasklist is scanned and each task is checked for intersection with > current's mems_allowed (task->mems_allowed, not dereferencing > task->cpuset). If it doesn't intersect, its "badness" score is divided by > eight. Yes - I recall seeing that change go by recently. Seemed good to me. > Yes, absolutely. > > I think Paul Menage is talking about filtering tasks that are not a member > of the same cpuset because we're more familiar with mem_exclusive cpusets. > So I think his suggestion was initially to filter based on overlapping > mems_allowed instead, which makes sense. > > void dump_tasks(const struct mem_cgroup *mem) As Paul M realized in his reply shortly ago, I missed the simple and essential detail that we were discussing the dump routine. It makes more sense now - thanks. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401 -- 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/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org