From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9C96B0044 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:58:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.65]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id nBF4vx88009903 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 04:57:59 GMT Received: from pwj11 (pwj11.prod.google.com [10.241.219.75]) by wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id nBF4vtnP008868 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:57:56 -0800 Received: by pwj11 with SMTP id 11so2083717pwj.22 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:57:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:57:53 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask v4.2 In-Reply-To: <20091215134327.6c46b586.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <20091110162121.361B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091110171704.3800f081.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091111112404.0026e601.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091111134514.4edd3011.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091111142811.eb16f062.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091111152004.3d585cee.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091111153414.3c263842.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091118095824.076c211f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091214171632.0b34d833.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20091215103202.eacfd64e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091215134327.6c46b586.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Andrew Morton , Daisuke Nishimura , KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Lameter List-ID: On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > That's not at all what I said. I said using total_vm as a baseline allows > > users to define when a process is to be considered "rogue," that is, using > > more memory than expected. Using rss would be inappropriate since it is > > highly dynamic and depends on the state of the VM at the time of oom, > > which userspace cannot possibly keep updated. > > > > You consistently ignore that point: the power of /proc/pid/oom_adj to > > influence when a process, such as a memory leaker, is to be considered as > > a high priority for an oom kill. It has absolutely nothing to do with > > fake NUMA, cpusets, or memcg. > > > You also ignore that it's not sane to use oom kill for resource control ;) > Please read my email. Did I say anything about resource control AT ALL? I said /proc/pid/oom_adj currently allows userspace to define when a task is "rogue," meaning its consuming much more memory than expected. Those memory leakers should always be the optimal result for the oom killer to kill. Using rss as the baseline would not allow userspace to effectively do the same thing since it's dynamic and depends on the state of the VM at the time of oom which is probably not reflected in the /proc/pid/oom_adj values for all tasks. It has absolutely nothing to do with resource control, so please address this very trivial issue without going off on tangents. Thanks. -- 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