linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@suse.cz>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch 4/7 -mm] oom: badness heuristic rewrite
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 01:23:35 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002170114300.30931@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <28c262361002162341m1d77509dv37d7d13b4ccd0ef9@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1975 bytes --]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Minchan Kim wrote:

> >> Okay. I can think it of slight penalization in this patch.
> >> But in current OOM logic, we try to kill child instead of forkbomb
> >> itself. My concern was that.
> >
> > We still do with my rewrite, that is handled in oom_kill_process(). A The
> > forkbomb penalization takes place in badness().
> 
> 
> I thought this patch is closely related to [patch  2/7].
> I can move this discussion to [patch 2/7] if you want.
> Another guys already pointed out why we care child.
> 

We have _always_ tried to kill a child of the selected task first if it 
has a seperate address space, patch 2 doesn't change that.  It simply 
tries to kill the child with the highest badness() score.

> I said this scenario is BUGGY forkbomb process. It will fork + exec continuously
> if it isn't killed. How does user intervene to fix the system?
> System was almost hang due to unresponsive.
> 

The user would need to kill the parent if it should be killed.  The 
unresponsiveness in this example, however, is not a question of the oom 
killer but rather the scheduler to provide interactivity to the user in 
forkbomb scenarios.  The oom killer should not create a policy that 
unfairly biases tasks that fork a large number of tasks, however, to 
provide interactivity since that task may be a vital system resource.

> For extreme example,
> User is writing some important document by OpenOffice and
> he decided to execute hackbench 1000000 process 1000000.
> 
> Could user save his important office data without halt if we kill
> child continuously?
> I think this scenario can be happened enough if the user didn't know
> parameter of hackbench.
> 

So what exactly are you proposing we do in the oom killer to distinguish 
between a user's mistake and a vital system resource?  I'm personally much 
more concerned with protecting system daemons that provide a service under 
heavyload than protecting against forkbombs in the oom killer.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-17  9:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-10 16:32 [patch 0/7 -mm] oom killer rewrite David Rientjes
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 1/7 -mm] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset David Rientjes
2010-02-10 17:08   ` Rik van Riel
2010-02-11 23:52   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-15  2:56   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15 22:06     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16  4:52       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16  6:01         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16  7:03         ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16  8:49           ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16  9:04             ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-16  9:10               ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16  8:46         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 2/7 -mm] oom: sacrifice child with highest badness score for parent David Rientjes
2010-02-10 20:52   ` Rik van Riel
2010-02-12  0:00   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-12  0:15     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-13  2:49   ` Minchan Kim
2010-02-15  3:08   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 3/7 -mm] oom: select task from tasklist for mempolicy ooms David Rientjes
2010-02-10 22:47   ` Rik van Riel
2010-02-15  5:03   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15 22:11     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16  5:15       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16 21:52         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17  0:48           ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17  1:13             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 4/7 -mm] oom: badness heuristic rewrite David Rientjes
2010-02-11  4:10   ` Rik van Riel
2010-02-11  9:14     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-11 15:07       ` Nick Bowler
2010-02-11 21:01         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-11 21:43       ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-11 21:51         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-11 22:31           ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-11 22:42             ` David Rientjes
2010-02-11 23:11               ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-11 23:31                 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-11 23:37                   ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-12 13:56       ` Minchan Kim
2010-02-12 21:00         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-13  2:45           ` Minchan Kim
2010-02-15 21:54             ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16 13:14               ` Minchan Kim
2010-02-16 21:41                 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-17  7:41                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-02-17  9:23                     ` David Rientjes [this message]
2010-02-17 13:08                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-02-15  8:05   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 5/7 -mm] oom: replace sysctls with quick mode David Rientjes
2010-02-12  0:26   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-12  9:58     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15  8:09   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15 22:15     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-16  5:25       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-16  9:04         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 6/7 -mm] oom: avoid oom killer for lowmem allocations David Rientjes
2010-02-11  4:13   ` Rik van Riel
2010-02-11  9:19     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-11 14:08       ` Rik van Riel
2010-02-12  1:28   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-12 10:06     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15  0:09       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-15 22:01         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15  8:29   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-10 16:32 ` [patch 7/7 -mm] oom: remove unnecessary code and cleanup David Rientjes
2010-02-12  0:12   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-02-12  0:21     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-15  8:31       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15  2:51 ` [patch 0/7 -mm] oom killer rewrite KOSAKI Motohiro

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.2.00.1002170114300.30931@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
    --to=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=l.lunak@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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