On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > memory.oom_score_adj would never need to be permanently tuned, just as
> > /proc/pid/oom_score_adj need never be permanently tuned. My response was
> > an answer to Roman's concern that "v8 has it's own limitations," but I
> > haven't seen a concrete
On Tue 31-10-17 15:21:23, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > I'm not ignoring them, I have stated that we need the ability to protect
> > > important cgroups on the system without oom disabling all attached
> > > processes. If that is implemented as a memor
On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > I'm not ignoring them, I have stated that we need the ability to protect
> > important cgroups on the system without oom disabling all attached
> > processes. If that is implemented as a memory.oom_score_adj with the same
> > semantics as /proc/pid/
On 10/31/2017 03:34 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 31-10-17 15:17:11, peter enderborg wrote:
>> On 10/27/2017 10:05 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:03:41PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> The nack is for three rea
On Tue 31-10-17 15:17:11, peter enderborg wrote:
> On 10/27/2017 10:05 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:03:41PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >>
> The nack is for three reasons:
>
> (1) unfair comparison of r
On 10/27/2017 10:05 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:03:41PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>
The nack is for three reasons:
(1) unfair comparison of root mem cgroup usage to bias against that mem
cgroup
On Mon 30-10-17 14:36:39, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2017, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>
> > The thing is that the hierarchical approach (as in v8), which are you
> > pushing,
> > has it's own limitations, which we've discussed in details earlier. There
> > are
> > reasons why v12 is diffe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> The thing is that the hierarchical approach (as in v8), which are you pushing,
> has it's own limitations, which we've discussed in details earlier. There are
> reasons why v12 is different, and we can't really simple go back. I mean if
> there are bett
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:03:41PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > > The nack is for three reasons:
> > >
> > > (1) unfair comparison of root mem cgroup usage to bias against that mem
> > > cgroup from oom kill in system oom conditions,
> >
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:03:41PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > > The nack is for three reasons:
> > >
> > > (1) unfair comparison of root mem cgroup usage to bias against that mem
> > > cgroup from oom kill in system oom conditions,
> >
On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > The nack is for three reasons:
> >
> > (1) unfair comparison of root mem cgroup usage to bias against that mem
> > cgroup from oom kill in system oom conditions,
> >
> > (2) the ability of users to completely evade the oom killer by attachi
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 05:24:51PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > David would have really liked for this patchset to include knobs to
> > influence how the algorithm picks cgroup victims. The rest of us
> > agreed that this is beyond the scope of t
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sun 22-10-17 17:24:51, David Rientjes wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >
> > > David would have really liked for this patchset to include knobs to
> > > influence how the algorithm picks cgroup victims. The rest of us
> > > agr
On Sun 22-10-17 17:24:51, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > David would have really liked for this patchset to include knobs to
> > influence how the algorithm picks cgroup victims. The rest of us
> > agreed that this is beyond the scope of these patches, th
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> David would have really liked for this patchset to include knobs to
> influence how the algorithm picks cgroup victims. The rest of us
> agreed that this is beyond the scope of these patches, that the
> patches don't need it to be useful, and that ther
On Thu 19-10-17 15:45:34, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 07:52:12PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > This patchset makes the OOM killer cgroup-aware.
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I believe this code is ready for merging upstream, and it seems Michal
> is in agreement. There are two main t
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 07:52:12PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> This patchset makes the OOM killer cgroup-aware.
Hi Andrew,
I believe this code is ready for merging upstream, and it seems Michal
is in agreement. There are two main things to consider, however.
David would have really liked for
This patchset makes the OOM killer cgroup-aware.
v12:
- Root memory cgroup is evaluated based on sum of the oom scores
of belonging tasks
- Do not fallback to the per-process behavior if there if
it wasn't possbile to kill a memcg victim
- Rebase on top of mm tree
v11:
- Fixed an
18 matches
Mail list logo
