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: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 15:25:05 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912031514150.8928@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091202091739.5C3D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> - I mean you don't need almost kernel heuristic. but desktop user need it.
My point is that userspace needs to be able to identify memory leaking
tasks and polarize oom killing priorities. /proc/pid/oom_adj does a good
job of both with total_vm as a baseline.
> - All job scheduler provide memory limitation feature. but OOM killer isn't
> for to implement memory limitation. we have memory cgroup.
Wrong, the oom killer implements cpuset memory limitations.
> - if you need memory usage based know, read /proc/{pid}/statm and write
> /proc/{pid}/oom_priority works well probably.
Constantly polling /proc/pid/stat and updating the oom killer priorities
at a constant interval is a ridiculous proposal for identifying memory
leakers, sorry.
> - Unfortunatelly, We can't continue to use VSZ based heuristics. because
> modern application waste 10x VSZ more than RSS comsumption. in nowadays,
> VSZ isn't good approximation value of RSS. There isn't any good reason to
> continue form desktop user view.
>
Then leave the heuristic alone by default so we don't lose any
functionality that we once had and then add additional heuristics
depending on the environment as determined by the manipulation of a new
tunable.
> IOW, kernel hueristic should adjust to target majority user. we provide a knob
> to help minority user.
>
Moving the baseline to rss severely impacts the legitimacy of that knob,
we lose a lot of control over identifying memory leakers and polarizing
oom killer priorities because it depends on the state of the VM at the
time of oom for which /proc/pid/oom_adj may not have recently been updated
to represent.
I don't know why you continuously invoke the same arguments to completely
change the baseline for the oom killer heuristic because you falsely
believe that killing the task with the largest memory resident in RAM is
more often than not the ideal task to kill. It's very frustrating when
you insist on changing the default heuristic based on your own belief that
people use Linux in the same way you do.
If Andrew pushes the patch to change the baseline to rss
(oom_kill-use-rss-instead-of-vm-size-for-badness.patch) to Linus, I'll
strongly nack it because you totally lack the ability to identify memory
leakers as defined by userspace which should be the prime target for the
oom killer. You have not addressed that problem, you've merely talked
around it, and yet the patch unbelievably still sits in -mm.
--
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:[~2009-12-03 23:25 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
2009-12-02 0:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-03 23:25 ` David Rientjes [this message]
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.2.00.0912031514150.8928@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