From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org>,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: Provide knob for force OOM into the memcg
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:33:58 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1412161430040.5142@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141216133935.GK22914@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Tue, 16 Dec 2014, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > We may want to use memcg to limit the total memory
> > footprint of all the processes within the one group.
> > This may lead to a situation where any arbitrary
> > process cannot get migrated to that one memcg
> > because its limits will be breached. Or, process can
> > get migrated but even being most recently used
> > process, it can get killed by in-cgroup OOM. To
> > avoid such scenarios, provide a convenient knob
> > by which we can forcefully trigger OOM and make
> > a room for upcoming process.
> >
> > To trigger force OOM,
> > $ echo 1 > /<memcg_path>/memory.force_oom
>
> What would prevent another task deplete that memory shortly after you
> triggered OOM and end up in the same situation? E.g. while the moving
> task is migrating its charges to the new group...
>
> Why cannot you simply disable OOM killer in that memcg and handle it
> from userspace properly?
>
The patch is introducing a mechanism to induce a kernel oom kill for a
memcg hierarchy to make room for it in the new memcg, not disable the oom
killer so the migration fails due to the lower limits.
It doesn't have any basis since a SIGKILL coming from userspace should be
considered the same as a kernel oom kill from the memcg perspective, i.e.
the fatal_signal_pending() checks that allow charge bypass instead of a
strict reliance on TIF_MEMDIE being set.
It seems to be proposed as a shortcut so that the kernel will determine
the best process to kill. That information is available to userspace so
it should be able to just SIGKILL the desired process (either in the
destination memcg or in the source memcg to allow deletion), so this
functionality isn't needed in the kernel.
--
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:[~2014-12-16 22:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-16 13:25 Chintan Pandya
2014-12-16 13:39 ` Michal Hocko
2014-12-16 22:33 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2014-12-17 11:47 ` Chintan Pandya
2014-12-16 16:59 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-12-17 12:11 ` Chintan Pandya
2014-12-19 21:15 ` Johannes Weiner
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.2.10.1412161430040.5142@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cpandya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--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