linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg, thp: do not invoke oom killer on thp charges
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 02:26:39 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803230208100.97541@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180323090704.GK23100@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:

> > Examples of where this isn't already done?  It certainly wasn't a problem 
> > before __GFP_NORETRY was dropped in commit 2516035499b9 but you suspect 
> > it's a problem now.
> 
> It is not a problem _right now_ as I've already pointed out few
> times. We do not trigger the OOM killer for anything but #PF path. But
> this is an implementation detail which can change in future and there is
> actually some demand for the change. Once we start triggering the oom
> killer for all charges then we do not really want to have the disparity.
> 

Ok, my patch is only addressing the code as it sits today, not any 
theoretical code in the future.  The fact remains that the 
PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER and high_zoneidx test for lowmem allocations in 
the allocation path are because oom killing is unlikely to free contiguous 
pages and lowmem, respectively.  We wouldn't avoid oom kill in memcg just 
because a charge is __GFP_DMA.  We shouldn't avoid oom kill in memcg just 
because the order is PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER: it's about contiguous 
memory, not about amount of memory.  I believe you understand that and so 
I'm optimistic that we are good in closing this thread out.  Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-23  9:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-21 20:59 Michal Hocko
2018-03-21 21:22 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-21 21:41   ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-22  8:26     ` David Rientjes
2018-03-22  8:56       ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-22 20:29         ` David Rientjes
2018-03-23  9:07           ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-23  9:26             ` David Rientjes [this message]
2018-04-03 14:54   ` Johannes Weiner
2018-04-03 14:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2018-04-03 15:55   ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-03 18:11     ` Johannes Weiner
2018-04-03 19:31 Michal Hocko

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.2.20.1803230208100.97541@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
    --to=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=vbabka@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