From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC 0/3] oom: few enahancements
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:00:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1452632425-20191-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)
Hi,
based on the recent discussions I have accumulated the following three
patches. I haven't tested them yet but I would like to hear your
opinion. The first patch only affects sysrq+f OOM killer. I believe it
should be relatively uncontroversial.
The patch 2 tweaks how we handle children tasks standing for the parent
oom victim. This should help the test case Tetsuo shown [1].
The patch 3 is just a rough idea. I can see objections there but this is
mainly to start discussion about ho to deal with small children which
basically do not sit on any memory. Maybe we do not need anything like
that at all and realy on multiple OOM invocations as a safer option. I
dunno but I would like to hear your opinions.
---
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201512292258.ABF87505.OFOSJLHMFVOQFt%40I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC 0/3] oom: few enahancements
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:00:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1452632425-20191-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)
Hi,
based on the recent discussions I have accumulated the following three
patches. I haven't tested them yet but I would like to hear your
opinion. The first patch only affects sysrq+f OOM killer. I believe it
should be relatively uncontroversial.
The patch 2 tweaks how we handle children tasks standing for the parent
oom victim. This should help the test case Tetsuo shown [1].
The patch 3 is just a rough idea. I can see objections there but this is
mainly to start discussion about ho to deal with small children which
basically do not sit on any memory. Maybe we do not need anything like
that at all and realy on multiple OOM invocations as a safer option. I
dunno but I would like to hear your opinions.
---
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201512292258.ABF87505.OFOSJLHMFVOQFt%40I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp
--
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 reply other threads:[~2016-01-12 21:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-12 21:00 Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-01-12 21:00 ` [RFC 0/3] oom: few enahancements Michal Hocko
2016-01-12 21:00 ` [RFC 1/3] oom, sysrq: Skip over oom victims and killed tasks Michal Hocko
2016-01-12 21:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-13 0:41 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-13 0:41 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-13 9:30 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-13 9:30 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-14 0:38 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-14 0:38 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-14 11:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-14 11:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-14 21:51 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-14 21:51 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-15 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-15 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-15 15:37 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-01-15 15:37 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-01-19 23:01 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-19 23:01 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-19 22:57 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-19 22:57 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-20 9:49 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-20 9:49 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-21 0:01 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-21 0:01 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-21 9:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-21 9:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-12 21:00 ` [RFC 2/3] oom: Do not sacrifice already OOM killed children Michal Hocko
2016-01-12 21:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-13 0:45 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-13 0:45 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-13 9:36 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-13 9:36 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-14 0:42 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-14 0:42 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-12 21:00 ` [RFC 3/3] oom: Do not try to sacrifice small children Michal Hocko
2016-01-12 21:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-13 0:51 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-13 0:51 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-13 9:40 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-13 9:40 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-14 0:43 ` David Rientjes
2016-01-14 0:43 ` David Rientjes
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=1452632425-20191-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.