From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 18:05:46 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH] badness() dramatically overcounts memory In-Reply-To: <20080206105041.2717.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <1202252561.24634.64.camel@dogma.ljc.laika.com> <20080206105041.2717.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Jeff Davis , balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrea Arcangeli List-ID: On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > Andrea Arcangeli has patches pending which change this to the RSS. > > Specifically: > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=119977937126925 > > I agreed with you that RSS is better :) > > > > but.. > on many node numa, per zone rss is more better.. > It depends on how your applications are taking advantage of NUMA optimizations. If they're constrained by mempolicies to a subset of nodes then the badness scoring isn't even used: the task that triggered the OOM condition is the one that is automatically killed. At this point, I think you're going to need to present an actual case study where Andrea's patch isn't sufficient for selecting the appropriate task on large NUMA machines. David -- 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