From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: zhongjinji@honor.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
rientjes@google.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, npache@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, dvhart@infradead.org,
dave@stgolabs.net, andrealmeid@igalia.com, liulu.liu@honor.com,
feng.han@honor.com
Subject: Re: [[PATCH v2] 2/2] futex: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futex
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 07:52:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJBKijr1nR1CleBL@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250801153649.23244-2-zhongjinji@honor.com>
On Fri 01-08-25 23:36:49, zhongjinji@honor.com wrote:
> From: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com>
>
> After merging the patch
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220414144042.677008-1-npache@redhat.com/T/#u,
> the OOM reaper runs less frequently because many processes exit within 2 seconds.
>
> However, when a process is killed, timely handling by the OOM reaper allows
> its memory to be freed faster.
>
> Since relatively few processes use robust futex, delaying the OOM reaper for
> all processes is undesirable, as many killed processes cannot release memory
> more quickly.
Could you elaborate more about why this is really needed? OOM should be
a very slow path. Why do you care about this potential improvement in
that situation? In other words what is the usecase?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-04 5:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-01 15:36 [[PATCH v2] 1/2] futex: Add check_robust_futex to verify process usage of robust_futex zhongjinji
2025-08-01 15:36 ` [[PATCH v2] 2/2] futex: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futex zhongjinji
2025-08-04 5:52 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2025-08-04 11:50 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-04 12:01 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-05 6:18 ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-05 14:55 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-05 13:19 ` zhongjinji
2025-08-05 16:02 ` [[PATCH v2] 1/2] futex: Add check_robust_futex to verify process usage of robust_futex Thomas Gleixner
2025-08-12 13:21 ` 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=aJBKijr1nR1CleBL@tiehlicka \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=feng.han@honor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liulu.liu@honor.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