From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, andrealmeid@igalia.com,
dvhart@infradead.org, feng.han@honor.com,
liam.howlett@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, liulu.liu@honor.com, mingo@redhat.com,
npache@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, rientjes@google.com,
shakeel.butt@linux.dev, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:45:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250821194515.ohw7rhgo4peepw63@offworld> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aKdhuOMrwgdxE9It@tiehlicka>
On Thu, 21 Aug 2025, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Tue 19-08-25 19:53:08, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> Yeah, relying on time as a fix is never a good idea. I was going to suggest
>> skipping the reaping for tasks with a robust list,
>
>let me reiterate that the purpose of the oom reaper is not an oom
>killing process optimization. It is crucial to guarantee a forward
>progress on the OOM situation by a) async memory reclaim of the oom
>victim and b) unblocking oom selection to a different process after a)
>is done. That means that the victim cannot block the oom situation for
>ever. Therefore we cannot really avoid tasks with robust futex or any
>other user processes without achieving b) at the same time.
Yes, which is why I indicated that skipping it was less practical.
In the real world, users that care enough to use robust futexes should
make sure that their application keep the OOM killer away altogether.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-21 19:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-14 13:55 [PATCH v4 0/3] " zhongjinji
2025-08-14 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] futex: Introduce function process_has_robust_futex() zhongjinji
2025-08-14 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes zhongjinji
2025-08-15 14:41 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-18 14:14 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-17 19:37 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-18 12:08 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-19 10:49 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-20 2:53 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-08-21 18:13 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-21 19:45 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2025-08-14 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] mm/oom_kill: Have the OOM reaper and exit_mmap() traverse the maple tree in opposite orders zhongjinji
2025-08-14 23:09 ` Andrew Morton
2025-08-15 16:32 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-15 17:52 ` gio
2025-08-15 17:53 ` gio
2025-08-15 14:29 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-15 15:01 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-15 17:37 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-19 15:18 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-21 9:32 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-25 14:12 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-15 14:41 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-08-15 16:05 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-08-14 23:13 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes Andrew Morton
2025-08-15 17:06 ` zhongjinji
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=20250821194515.ohw7rhgo4peepw63@offworld \
--to=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=feng.han@honor.com \
--cc=liam.howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liulu.liu@honor.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zhongjinji@honor.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