From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: vedran.furac@gmail.com, Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
minchan.kim@gmail.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Memory overcommit
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:58:04 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0911031752180.1187@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091104095021.5532e913.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > That's a different point. Today, we can influence the badness score of
> > any user thread to prioritize oom killing from userspace and that can be
> > done regardless of whether there's a memory leaker, a fork bomber, etc.
> > The priority based oom killing is important to production scenarios and
> > cannot be replaced by a heuristic that works everytime if it cannot be
> > influenced by userspace.
> >
> I don't removed oom_adj...
>
Right, but we must ensure that we have the same ability to influence a
priority based oom killing scheme from userspace as we currently do with a
relatively static total_vm. total_vm may not be the optimal baseline, but
it does allow users to tune oom_adj specifically to identify tasks that
are using more memory than expected and to be static enough to not depend
on rss, for example, that is really hard to predict at the time of oom.
That's actually my main goal in this discussion: to avoid losing any
ability of userspace to influence to priority of tasks being oom killed
(if you haven't noticed :).
> > Tweaking on the heuristic will probably make it more convoluted and
> > overall worse, I agree. But it's a more stable baseline than rss from
> > which we can set oom killing priorities from userspace.
>
> - "rss < total_vm_size" always.
But rss is much more dynamic than total_vm, that's my point.
> - oom_adj culculation is quite strong.
> - total_vm of processes which maps hugetlb is very big ....but killing them
> is no help for usual oom.
>
> I recommend you to add "stable baseline" knob for user space, as I wrote.
> My patch 6 adds stable baseline bonus as 50% of vm size if run_time is enough
> large.
>
There's no clear relationship between VM size and runtime. The forkbomb
heuristic itself could easily return a badness of ULONG_MAX if one is
detected using runtime and number of children, as I earlier proposed, but
that doesn't seem helpful to factor into the scoring.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-04 1:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <hav57c$rso$1@ger.gmane.org>
[not found] ` <20091013120840.a844052d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
[not found] ` <hb2cfu$r08$2@ger.gmane.org>
[not found] ` <20091014135119.e1baa07f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
2009-10-20 21:52 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-26 1:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-26 16:16 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-27 3:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 6:10 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-10-27 6:34 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-27 6:36 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 6:55 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-27 7:45 ` [RFC][PATCH] oom_kill: avoid depends on total_vm and use real RSS/swap value for oom_score (Re: " KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 7:56 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-27 12:38 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-10-28 0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-28 0:45 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-27 7:56 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 8:14 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-27 8:33 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 8:52 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-27 8:56 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 17:41 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-28 0:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 18:39 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-10-27 18:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-10-28 0:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-05 19:02 ` Pavel Machek
2009-10-28 0:28 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-27 6:46 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-10-27 6:56 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-27 17:12 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-27 18:02 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-10-27 18:30 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-27 20:44 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-10-27 21:04 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 0:08 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-28 0:25 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 0:39 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-28 4:08 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 4:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-28 5:13 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 6:05 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-28 6:17 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 6:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-29 8:38 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 11:11 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-29 19:53 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 23:48 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-30 9:10 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-30 9:36 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-03 20:49 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-04 0:50 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-04 1:58 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2009-11-04 2:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-04 3:10 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-04 3:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-30 13:59 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-30 19:24 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-02 19:58 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-28 13:28 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-28 20:10 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 3:05 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-29 8:35 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 11:01 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-29 19:42 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-30 13:53 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-30 14:08 ` Thomas Fjellstrom
2009-10-30 15:13 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-30 14:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-10-30 14:41 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-30 15:15 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-10-30 16:24 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-11-02 19:56 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-30 19:44 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-02 19:56 ` Vedran Furač
2009-10-28 0:43 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-28 2:47 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-10-28 3:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-28 4:12 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 8:10 ` Hugh Dickins
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=alpine.DEB.2.00.0911031752180.1187@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=vedran.furac@gmail.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