From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
vedran.furac@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: use rss value instead of vm size for badness
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:20:08 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912011414510.27500@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091201131509.5C19.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > The purpose of /proc/pid/oom_adj is not always to polarize the heuristic
> > for the task it represents, it allows userspace to define when a task is
> > rogue. Working with total_vm as a baseline, it is simple to use the
> > interface to tune the heuristic to prefer a certain task over another when
> > its memory consumption goes beyond what is expected. With this interface,
> > I can easily define when an application should be oom killed because it is
> > using far more memory than expected. I can also disable oom killing
> > completely for it, if necessary. Unless you have a consistent baseline
> > for all tasks, the adjustment wouldn't contextually make any sense. Using
> > rss does not allow users to statically define when a task is rogue and is
> > dependent on the current state of memory at the time of oom.
> >
> > I would support removing most of the other heuristics other than the
> > baseline and the nodes intersection with mems_allowed to prefer tasks in
> > the same cpuset, though, to make it easier to understand and tune.
>
> I feel you talked about oom_adj doesn't fit your use case. probably you need
> /proc/{pid}/oom_priority new knob. oom adjustment doesn't fit you.
> you need job severity based oom killing order. severity doesn't depend on any
> hueristic.
> server administrator should know job severity on his system.
>
That's the complete opposite of what I wrote above, we use oom_adj to
define when a user application is considered "rogue," meaning that it is
using far more memory than expected and so we want it killed. As you
mentioned weeks ago, the kernel cannot identify a memory leaker; this is
the user interface to allow the oom killer to identify a memory-hogging
rogue task that will (probably) consume all system memory eventually.
The way oom_adj is implemented, with a bit shift on a baseline of
total_vm, it can also polarize the badness heuristic to kill an
application based on priority by examining /proc/pid/oom_score, but that
wasn't my concern in this case. Using rss as a baseline reduces my
ability to tune oom_adj appropriately to identify those rogue tasks
because it is highly dynamic depending on the state of the VM at the time
of oom.
--
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:[~2009-12-01 22:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-28 8:58 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-28 9:15 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 11:04 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-29 1:00 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-29 2:31 ` Minchan Kim
2009-10-29 8:31 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 8:46 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-29 9:01 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 9:16 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-10-29 9:44 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 23:41 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-01 13:29 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-02 10:42 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-02 12:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-02 19:55 ` Vedran Furač
2009-11-03 23:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-07 19:16 ` Vedran Furač
2009-11-25 12:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-11-25 21:39 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-27 18:26 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-11-30 23:09 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-01 4:43 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-01 22:20 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2009-12-02 0:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-03 23:25 ` David Rientjes
2009-12-04 0:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-26 0:10 ` Vedran Furač
2009-11-26 1:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-11-27 1:56 ` Vedran Furač
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.2.00.0912011414510.27500@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=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