From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lb0-f200.google.com (mail-lb0-f200.google.com [209.85.217.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD366B0260 for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 11:15:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f200.google.com with SMTP id f14so30345785lbb.2 for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 08:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.laposte.net (smtpoutz27.laposte.net. [194.117.213.102]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y9si22618161wje.220.2016.05.13.08.15.27 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 May 2016 08:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.laposte.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lpn-prd-vrout015 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026071C8DC3 for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 17:15:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lpn-prd-vrin001 (lpn-prd-vrin001.laposte [10.128.63.2]) by lpn-prd-vrout015 (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3C91C8DB1 for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 17:15:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lpn-prd-vrin001 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lpn-prd-vrin001 (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCDFC366A0A for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 17:15:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5735EF8E.4000707@laposte.net> Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 17:15:26 +0200 From: Sebastian Frias MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: add config option to select the initial overcommit mode References: <5731CC6E.3080807@laposte.net> <20160513080458.GF20141@dhcp22.suse.cz> <573593EE.6010502@free.fr> <5735A3DE.9030100@laposte.net> <20160513120042.GK20141@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5735CAE5.5010104@laposte.net> <935da2a3-1fda-bc71-48a5-bb212db305de@gmail.com> <5735D7FC.3070409@laposte.net> <20160513160142.2cc7d695@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20160513160142.2cc7d695@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: One Thousand Gnomes Cc: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" , Michal Hocko , Mason , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , LKML Hi Alan, On 05/13/2016 05:01 PM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: > On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:34:52 +0200 > Sebastian Frias wrote: > >> Hi Austin, >> >> On 05/13/2016 03:11 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: >>> On 2016-05-13 08:39, Sebastian Frias wrote: >>>> >>>> My point is that it seems to be possible to deal with such conditions in a more controlled way, ie: a way that is less random and less abrupt. >>> There's an option for the OOM-killer to just kill the allocating task instead of using the scoring heuristic. This is about as deterministic as things can get though. >> >> By the way, why does it has to "kill" anything in that case? >> I mean, shouldn't it just tell the allocating task that there's not enough memory by letting malloc return NULL? > > Just turn off overcommit and it will do that. With overcommit disabled > the kernel will not hand out address space in excess of memory plus swap. I think I'm confused. Michal just said: "And again, overcommit=never doesn't imply no-OOM. It just makes it less likely. The kernel can consume quite some unreclaimable memory as well." which I understand as the OOM-killer will still lurk around and could still wake up. Will overcommit=never totally disable the OOM-Killer or not? Best regards, Sebastian -- 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