From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 63C456B0044 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 19:28:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.72]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id nA40S9wO004065 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:28:09 +0900 Received: from smail (m2 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E74645DE4E for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:28:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.92]) by m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 300AF45DE51 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:28:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A201DB8043 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:28:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from m105.s.css.fujitsu.com (m105.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.105]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA071DB803B for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:28:08 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:25:34 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm][PATCH 5/6] oom-killer: check last total_vm expansion Message-Id: <20091104092534.626a2352.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20091102162244.9425e49b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091102162837.405783f3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: David Rientjes Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, KOSAKI Motohiro , Andrea Arcangeli , Andrew Morton , minchan.kim@gmail.com, vedran.furac@gmail.com, Hugh Dickins List-ID: On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:29:39 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > > At considering oom-kill algorithm, we can't avoid to take runtime > > into account. But this can adds too big bonus to slow-memory-leaker. > > For adding penalty to slow-memory-leaker, we record jiffies of > > the last mm->hiwater_vm expansion. That catches processes which leak > > memory periodically. > > > > No, it doesn't, it simply measures the last time the hiwater mark was > increased. That could have increased by a single page in the last tick > with no increase in memory consumption over the past year and then its > unfairly biased against for quiet_time in the new oom kill heuristic > (patch 6). Using this as part of the badness scoring is ill conceived > because it doesn't necessarily indicate a memory leaking task, just one > that has recently allocated memory. Hmm. Maybe I can rewrite this as "periodic expansion have done or not" code. Okay, this patch itself will be dropped. If you find better algorithm, let me know. Thanks, -Kame -- 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