From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Andrey Grodzovsky <andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Christian.Koenig@amd.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Per file OOM badness
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:00:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1516294072-17841-1-git-send-email-andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com>
On Thu 18-01-18 11:47:48, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
> Hi, this series is a revised version of an RFC sent by Christian Konig
> a few years ago. The original RFC can be found at
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2015-September/089778.html
>
> This is the same idea and I've just adressed his concern from the original RFC
> and switched to a callback into file_ops instead of a new member in struct file.
Please add the full description to the cover letter and do not make
people hunt links.
Here is the origin cover letter text
: I'm currently working on the issue that when device drivers allocate memory on
: behalf of an application the OOM killer usually doesn't knew about that unless
: the application also get this memory mapped into their address space.
:
: This is especially annoying for graphics drivers where a lot of the VRAM
: usually isn't CPU accessible and so doesn't make sense to map into the
: address space of the process using it.
:
: The problem now is that when an application starts to use a lot of VRAM those
: buffers objects sooner or later get swapped out to system memory, but when we
: now run into an out of memory situation the OOM killer obviously doesn't knew
: anything about that memory and so usually kills the wrong process.
:
: The following set of patches tries to address this problem by introducing a per
: file OOM badness score, which device drivers can use to give the OOM killer a
: hint how many resources are bound to a file descriptor so that it can make
: better decisions which process to kill.
:
: So question at every one: What do you think about this approach?
:
: My biggest concern right now is the patches are messing with a core kernel
: structure (adding a field to struct file). Any better idea? I'm considering
: to put a callback into file_ops instead.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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:[~2018-01-18 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-18 16:47 Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-01-18 16:47 ` [PATCH 1/4] fs: add OOM badness callback in file_operatrations struct Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-01-18 16:47 ` [PATCH 2/4] oom: take per file badness into account Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-01-18 16:47 ` [PATCH 3/4] drm/gem: adjust per file OOM badness on handling buffers Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-01-19 6:01 ` Chunming Zhou
2018-01-18 16:47 ` [PATCH 4/4] drm/amdgpu: Use drm_oom_badness for amdgpu Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-01-30 9:24 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-01-30 12:42 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-01-18 17:00 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-01-18 17:13 ` [RFC] Per file OOM badness Michal Hocko
2018-01-18 20:01 ` Eric Anholt
2018-01-19 8:20 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-19 8:39 ` Christian König
2018-01-19 9:32 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-19 9:58 ` Christian König
2018-01-19 10:02 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-19 15:07 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-21 6:50 ` Eric Anholt
2018-01-19 10:40 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-19 11:37 ` Christian König
2018-01-19 12:13 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-19 12:20 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-19 16:54 ` Christian König
2018-01-23 11:39 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-19 16:48 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-19 8:35 ` Christian König
2018-01-19 6:01 ` He, Roger
2018-01-19 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-19 10:02 ` roger
2018-01-23 15:27 ` Roman Gushchin
2018-01-23 15:36 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-23 16:39 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-24 9:28 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-24 10:27 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-24 11:01 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-24 11:23 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-24 11:50 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-24 12:11 ` Christian König
2018-01-30 9:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-01-30 9:43 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 10:40 ` Christian König
2018-01-30 11:02 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 11:28 ` Christian König
2018-01-30 11:34 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 11:36 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2018-01-30 11:42 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 11:56 ` Christian König
2018-01-30 15:52 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 10:42 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-01-30 10:48 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 11:35 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2018-01-24 14:31 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 9:29 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-30 10:28 ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-26 14:36 ` Lucas Stach
2018-04-04 9:09 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-04-04 9:36 ` Lucas Stach
2018-04-04 9:46 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-01-19 5:39 ` He, Roger
2018-01-19 8:17 ` Christian König
2018-01-22 23:23 ` Andrew Morton
2018-01-23 1:59 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
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=20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=Christian.Koenig@amd.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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