On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:20:11 +0100 Michal Hocko wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] oom, memcg: clarify root memcg oom accounting
>
> David Rientjes has pointed out that the current way how the root memcg
> is accounted for the cgroup aware OOM killer is undocumented. Unlike
> regular
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 01:20:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From 361275a05ad7026b8f721f8aa756a4975a2c42b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 09:54:15 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] oom, memcg: clarify root memcg oom accounting
>
> David Rientjes
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 01:20:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From 361275a05ad7026b8f721f8aa756a4975a2c42b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 09:54:15 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] oom, memcg: clarify root memcg oom accounting
>
> David Rientjes
On Tue 30-01-18 11:58:51, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:54:45AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 29-01-18 11:11:39, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Hello, Michal!
>
> > diff --git a/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt b/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt
> > index 2eaed1e2243d..67bdf19f8e5b
On Mon 29-01-18 11:11:39, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Michal.
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:46:57AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > @@ -1292,7 +1292,11 @@ the memory controller considers only cgroups
> > belonging to the sub-tree
> > of the OOM'ing cgroup.
> >
> > The root cgroup is treated as
Hello, Michal.
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:46:57AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> @@ -1292,7 +1292,11 @@ the memory controller considers only cgroups belonging
> to the sub-tree
> of the OOM'ing cgroup.
>
> The root cgroup is treated as a leaf memory cgroup, so it's compared
> -with other leaf
On Fri 26-01-18 16:17:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 14:52:59 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes
> wrote:
[...]
> > Those use cases are also undocumented such that the user doesn't know the
> > behavior they are opting into. Nowhere in the patchset does it mention
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > -ECONFUSED. We want to have a mount option that has the sole purpose of
> > doing echo cgroup > /mnt/cgroup/memory.oom_policy?
>
> Approximately. Let me put it another way: can we modify your patchset
> so that the mount option remains, and
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 14:20:24 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes
wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > Now that each mem cgroup on the system has a memory.oom_policy tunable to
> > > specify oom kill selection behavior, remove the needless "groupoom" mount
> >
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Now that each mem cgroup on the system has a memory.oom_policy tunable to
> > specify oom kill selection behavior, remove the needless "groupoom" mount
> > option that requires (1) the entire system to be forced, perhaps
> > unnecessarily, perhaps
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:53:48 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes
wrote:
> Now that each mem cgroup on the system has a memory.oom_policy tunable to
> specify oom kill selection behavior, remove the needless "groupoom" mount
> option that requires (1) the entire system to be forced,
11 matches
Mail list logo