From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v4.2
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:09:13 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091215140913.e28f7674.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912142054520.436@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:57:53 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>
> > > That's not at all what I said. I said using total_vm as a baseline allows
> > > users to define when a process is to be considered "rogue," that is, using
> > > more memory than expected. Using rss would be inappropriate since it is
> > > highly dynamic and depends on the state of the VM at the time of oom,
> > > which userspace cannot possibly keep updated.
> > >
> > > You consistently ignore that point: the power of /proc/pid/oom_adj to
> > > influence when a process, such as a memory leaker, is to be considered as
> > > a high priority for an oom kill. It has absolutely nothing to do with
> > > fake NUMA, cpusets, or memcg.
> > >
> > You also ignore that it's not sane to use oom kill for resource control ;)
> >
>
> Please read my email. Did I say anything about resource control AT ALL?
> I said /proc/pid/oom_adj currently allows userspace to define when a task
> is "rogue," meaning its consuming much more memory than expected. Those
> memory leakers should always be the optimal result for the oom killer to
> kill. Using rss as the baseline would not allow userspace to effectively
> do the same thing since it's dynamic and depends on the state of the VM at
> the time of oom which is probably not reflected in the /proc/pid/oom_adj
> values for all tasks. It has absolutely nothing to do with resource
> control, so please address this very trivial issue without going off on
> tangents. Thanks.
What I can't undestand is the technique to know whether a (unknown) process is
leaking memory or not by checking vm_size.
And, why don't you use overcommit_memory when you can depends on vm_size ?
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-15 5:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-04 8:09 [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-06 0:02 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v2 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-10 7:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-10 7:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-10 7:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-10 7:40 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-10 8:03 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-11-10 8:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 2:24 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v3 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 2:36 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-11 2:49 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-11 3:02 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-11 3:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 3:14 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-11 3:23 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-11 3:27 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-11 3:04 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 4:45 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v4 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 5:28 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v4.1 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 5:58 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-11 6:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 6:26 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-11 6:34 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v4.2 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-11 7:32 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-18 0:11 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-18 0:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-18 2:13 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-15 1:16 ` Andrew Morton
2009-12-15 1:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-12-15 1:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15 4:30 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-15 4:35 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-12-15 4:54 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-15 5:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-17 22:21 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-18 4:30 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-18 10:04 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-15 4:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-12-15 4:43 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-12-15 4:57 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-15 5:09 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2009-12-17 22:23 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-17 23:33 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-12-15 4:47 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15 5:03 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-18 1:41 ` Daisuke Nishimura
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=20091215140913.e28f7674.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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