From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752045AbdHAM3Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2017 08:29:25 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:55445 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751599AbdHAM3J (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2017 08:29:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 14:29:05 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Johannes Weiner , Tetsuo Handa , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm, oom: do not grant oom victims full memory reserves access Message-ID: <20170801122905.GL15774@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170727090357.3205-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170801121643.GI15774@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170801122344.GA8457@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170801122344.GA8457@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 01-08-17 13:23:44, Roman Gushchin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:16:44PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 27-07-17 11:03:55, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > Hi, > > > this is a part of a larger series I posted back in Oct last year [1]. I > > > have dropped patch 3 because it was incorrect and patch 4 is not > > > applicable without it. > > > > > > The primary reason to apply patch 1 is to remove a risk of the complete > > > memory depletion by oom victims. While this is a theoretical risk right > > > now there is a demand for memcg aware oom killer which might kill all > > > processes inside a memcg which can be a lot of tasks. That would make > > > the risk quite real. > > > > > > This issue is addressed by limiting access to memory reserves. We no > > > longer use TIF_MEMDIE to grant the access and use tsk_is_oom_victim > > > instead. See Patch 1 for more details. Patch 2 is a trivial follow up > > > cleanup. > > > > Any comments, concerns? Can we merge it? > > I've rebased the cgroup-aware OOM killer and ran some tests. > Everything works well. Thanks for your testing. Can I assume your Tested-by? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f72.google.com (mail-wm0-f72.google.com [74.125.82.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AA9C6B0539 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 08:29:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f72.google.com with SMTP id a186so2260274wmh.9 for ; Tue, 01 Aug 2017 05:29:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w140si1161278wmw.19.2017.08.01.05.29.08 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Aug 2017 05:29:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 14:29:05 +0200 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm, oom: do not grant oom victims full memory reserves access Message-ID: <20170801122905.GL15774@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170727090357.3205-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170801121643.GI15774@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170801122344.GA8457@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170801122344.GA8457@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Johannes Weiner , Tetsuo Handa , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML On Tue 01-08-17 13:23:44, Roman Gushchin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:16:44PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 27-07-17 11:03:55, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > Hi, > > > this is a part of a larger series I posted back in Oct last year [1]. I > > > have dropped patch 3 because it was incorrect and patch 4 is not > > > applicable without it. > > > > > > The primary reason to apply patch 1 is to remove a risk of the complete > > > memory depletion by oom victims. While this is a theoretical risk right > > > now there is a demand for memcg aware oom killer which might kill all > > > processes inside a memcg which can be a lot of tasks. That would make > > > the risk quite real. > > > > > > This issue is addressed by limiting access to memory reserves. We no > > > longer use TIF_MEMDIE to grant the access and use tsk_is_oom_victim > > > instead. See Patch 1 for more details. Patch 2 is a trivial follow up > > > cleanup. > > > > Any comments, concerns? Can we merge it? > > I've rebased the cgroup-aware OOM killer and ran some tests. > Everything works well. Thanks for your testing. Can I assume your Tested-by? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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: email@kvack.org