From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 78C066B0082 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 19:00:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.72]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o2900lJF015672 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:00:47 +0900 Received: from smail (m2 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2301E45DE51 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:00:47 +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 D2A361EF081 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:00:46 +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 B87431DB803E for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:00:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5642D1DB8040 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:00:46 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 08:57:11 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] memcg: oom notifier and handling oom by user Message-Id: <20100309085711.f9158491.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20100308172609.GS3073@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20100308162414.faaa9c5f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100308172609.GS3073@balbir.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-ID: On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:56:09 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2010-03-08 16:24:14]: > > > This 2 patches is for memcg's oom handling. > > > > At first, memcg's oom doesn't mean "no more resource" but means "we hit limit." > > Then, daemons/user shells out of a memcg can work even if it's under oom. > > So, if we have notifier and some more features, we can do something moderate > > rather than killing at oom. > > > > This patch includes > > [1/2] oom notifier for memcg (using evetfd framework of cgroups.) > > [2/2] oom killer disalibing and hooks for waitq and wake-up. > > > > When memcg's oom-killer is disabled, all tasks which request accountable memory > > will sleep in waitq. It will be waken up by user's action as > > - enlarge limit. (memory or memsw) > > - kill some tasks > > - move some tasks (account migration is enabled.) > > > > Hmm... I've not seen the waitq and wake-up patches, but does that mean > user space will control resumtion of tasks? > Yes. And what's useful in this behavior rathar than oom-kill(SIGKILL) by the kernel is that users can take coredump (by gcore at el.) and snapshot of all tasks's resource usage (by ps at el.) even if he has to kill a task. 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