linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
	balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	williams@redhat.com,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] oom-kill: give the dying task a higher priority
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 16:05:48 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTilYtODW-8Ey2IUTT2lRR3sy0kgSOO7rN32rjvux@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100531152424.739D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 3:35 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
>> Hi, Kosaki.
>>
>> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:59 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
>> <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> >> oom-killer: give the dying task rt priority (v3)
>> >>
>> >> Give the dying task RT priority so that it can be scheduled quickly and die,
>> >> freeing needed memory.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Luis Claudio R. Gonçalves <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
>> >
>> > Almostly acceptable to me. but I have two requests,
>> >
>> > - need 1) force_sig() 2)sched_setscheduler() order as Oleg mentioned
>> > - don't boost priority if it's in mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
>>
>> Why do you want to not boost priority if it's path of memcontrol?
>>
>> If it's path of memcontrol and CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR is enabled,
>> mem_cgroup_out_of_memory will select victim task in memcg.
>> So __oom_kill_task's target task would be in memcg, I think.
>
> Yep.
> But priority boost naturally makes CPU starvation for out of the group
> processes.
> It seems to break cgroup's isolation concept.
>
>> As you and memcg guys don't complain this, I would be missing something.
>> Could you explain it? :)
>
> So, My points are,
>
> 1) Usually priority boost is wrong idea. It have various side effect, but
>   system wide OOM is one of exception. In such case, all tasks aren't
>   runnable, then, the downside is acceptable.
> 2) memcg have OOM notification mechanism. If the admin need priority boost,
>   they can do it by their OOM-daemon.

Is it possible kill the hogging task immediately when the daemon send
kill signal?
I mean we can make OOM daemon higher priority than others and it can
send signal to normal process. but when is normal process exited after
receiving kill signal from OOM daemon? Maybe it's when killed task is
executed by scheduler. It's same problem again, I think.

Kame, Do you have an idea?

> Thanks.
>
>
>



-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-31  7:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-27 18:04 Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-27 18:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-28  2:54   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-28  3:51     ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-28  4:33       ` Balbir Singh
2010-05-28  4:46         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-28  5:30           ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28  5:39             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-28  5:50               ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28  5:59                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-28  7:52                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28 12:53                   ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-28 14:06                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28 14:20                       ` Balbir Singh
2010-05-28 15:03                         ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28 14:36                       ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-28 15:12                         ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28 15:21                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-28 15:35                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28 15:28                           ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-28 15:45                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-28 16:48                               ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-29  3:59                                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-31  2:15                                   ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-31  5:06                                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31  6:35                                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-31  7:05                                       ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2010-05-31  7:25                                         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-31  9:30                                           ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-30 15:09                                 ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31  0:21                                 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-31  5:01                                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31  5:04                                     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-31  5:46                                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31  5:54                                         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-31  6:09                                           ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31  6:51                                             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-31 10:33                                               ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31 13:52                                               ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-05-31 23:50                                                 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-01 17:35                                                   ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-06-01 20:49                                                     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 13:54                                                       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-02 14:20                                                         ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2010-06-02 21:11                                                         ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 23:36                                                           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-03  0:52                                                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-06-03  7:50                                                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-03 20:32                                                             ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01  8:19                                                 ` Minchan Kim
2010-06-01 18:36                                                   ` David Rientjes
2010-05-28  6:27           ` Balbir Singh
2010-05-28  6:34             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-28  6:38             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-28 15:53       ` Peter Zijlstra

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=AANLkTilYtODW-8Ey2IUTT2lRR3sy0kgSOO7rN32rjvux@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=lclaudio@uudg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=williams@redhat.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