From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:01:15 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401091551390.20263@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140109144757.e95616b4280c049b22743a15@linux-foundation.org>
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I'm not sure why this was dropped since it's vitally needed for any sane
> > userspace oom handler to be effective.
>
> It was dropped because the other memcg developers disagreed with it.
>
It was acked-by Michal.
> I'd really prefer not to have to spend a great amount of time parsing
> argumentative and repetitive emails to make a tie-break decision which
> may well be wrong anyway.
>
> Please work with the other guys to find an acceptable implementation.
> There must be *something* we can do?
>
We REQUIRE this behavior for a sane userspace oom handler implementation.
You've snipped my email quite extensively, but I'd like to know
specifically how you would implement a userspace oom handler described by
Section 10 of Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt without this patch?
Are you suggesting that userspace is supposed to wait for successive
wakeups over some arbitrarily defined period of time to determine whether
memory freeing (i.e. a process in the exit() path or with a pending
SIGKILL making forward progress to free its memory) can be done or whether
it needs to do something to free memory? If not, how else is userspace
supposed to know that it should act?
How do you prevent unnecessary oom killing if the userspace oom handler
wakes up and kills something concurrent with the process triggering the
notification getting access to memory reserves, exiting, and freeing its
memory? Userspace just killed a process unnecessarily. This is the exact
reason why the kernel oom killer doesn't do a damn thing in these
conditions, because it's NOT ACTIONABLE by the oom killer, a process
simply needs to exit.
--
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:[~2014-01-10 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-31 1:39 [patch] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom David Rientjes
2013-10-31 5:49 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-13 22:19 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-13 23:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-14 0:56 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-14 3:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-14 22:57 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-14 23:26 ` [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves David Rientjes
2013-11-14 23:26 ` [patch 2/2] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom David Rientjes
2013-11-18 18:52 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-19 1:25 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-19 12:41 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-18 12:52 ` [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves Michal Hocko
2013-11-18 12:55 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-19 1:19 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-18 15:41 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-18 16:51 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-19 1:22 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-22 16:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-27 0:53 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-27 16:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-27 21:51 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-27 23:19 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-28 0:22 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-28 2:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-28 2:52 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-28 3:16 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-02 20:02 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-02 21:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-03 12:04 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-03 20:17 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-03 21:00 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-03 21:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-03 23:50 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-04 3:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-04 11:13 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-05 0:23 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-09 12:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-09 21:46 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-09 22:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-09 23:05 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-10 0:34 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-10 10:38 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-11 1:03 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-11 9:55 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-11 22:40 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-12 10:31 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-12 10:50 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-12 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-12 12:37 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-13 23:55 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-17 16:23 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-17 20:50 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-18 20:04 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-19 6:09 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-19 14:41 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-08 0:25 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-08 10:33 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-09 14:30 ` [PATCH] memcg: Do not hang on OOM when killed by userspace OOM " Michal Hocko
2014-01-09 21:40 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-10 21:33 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-15 14:26 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-15 21:19 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-16 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-21 6:13 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-21 13:21 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-09 21:34 ` [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs " David Rientjes
2014-01-09 22:47 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-10 0:01 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2014-01-10 0:12 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-10 0:23 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 0:35 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 22:14 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-12 22:10 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-15 14:34 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-15 21:23 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-16 9:32 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-21 5:58 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-21 6:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartmann
2014-01-21 6:08 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 8:30 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-10 21:38 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 22:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-12 22:14 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-18 15:54 ` [patch] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom Johannes Weiner
2013-11-18 23:15 ` One Thousand Gnomes
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.2.02.1401091551390.20263@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
/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