From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, <kernel-team@fb.com>, <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [v8 0/4] cgroup-aware OOM killer Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:56:07 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170913215607.GA19259@castle> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20170913122914.5gdksbmkolum7ita@dhcp22.suse.cz> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 02:29:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 11-09-17 13:44:39, David Rientjes wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Roman Gushchin wrote: > > > > > This patchset makes the OOM killer cgroup-aware. > > > > > > v8: > > > - Do not kill tasks with OOM_SCORE_ADJ -1000 > > > - Make the whole thing opt-in with cgroup mount option control > > > - Drop oom_priority for further discussions > > > > Nack, we specifically require oom_priority for this to function correctly, > > otherwise we cannot prefer to kill from low priority leaf memcgs as > > required. > > While I understand that your usecase might require priorities I do not > think this part missing is a reason to nack the cgroup based selection > and kill-all parts. This can be done on top. The only important part > right now is the current selection semantic - only leaf memcgs vs. size > of the hierarchy). I agree. > I strongly believe that comparing only leaf memcgs > is more straightforward and it doesn't lead to unexpected results as > mentioned before (kill a small memcg which is a part of the larger > sub-hierarchy). One of two main goals of this patchset is to introduce cgroup-level fairness: bigger cgroups should be affected more than smaller, despite the size of tasks inside. I believe the same principle should be used for cgroups. Also, the opposite will make oom_semantics more weird: it will mean kill all tasks, but also treat memcg as a leaf cgroup. > > I didn't get to read the new version of this series yet and hope to get > to it soon. Thanks!
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, kernel-team@fb.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [v8 0/4] cgroup-aware OOM killer Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:56:07 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170913215607.GA19259@castle> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20170913122914.5gdksbmkolum7ita@dhcp22.suse.cz> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 02:29:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 11-09-17 13:44:39, David Rientjes wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Roman Gushchin wrote: > > > > > This patchset makes the OOM killer cgroup-aware. > > > > > > v8: > > > - Do not kill tasks with OOM_SCORE_ADJ -1000 > > > - Make the whole thing opt-in with cgroup mount option control > > > - Drop oom_priority for further discussions > > > > Nack, we specifically require oom_priority for this to function correctly, > > otherwise we cannot prefer to kill from low priority leaf memcgs as > > required. > > While I understand that your usecase might require priorities I do not > think this part missing is a reason to nack the cgroup based selection > and kill-all parts. This can be done on top. The only important part > right now is the current selection semantic - only leaf memcgs vs. size > of the hierarchy). I agree. > I strongly believe that comparing only leaf memcgs > is more straightforward and it doesn't lead to unexpected results as > mentioned before (kill a small memcg which is a part of the larger > sub-hierarchy). One of two main goals of this patchset is to introduce cgroup-level fairness: bigger cgroups should be affected more than smaller, despite the size of tasks inside. I believe the same principle should be used for cgroups. Also, the opposite will make oom_semantics more weird: it will mean kill all tasks, but also treat memcg as a leaf cgroup. > > I didn't get to read the new version of this series yet and hope to get > to it soon. Thanks! -- 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 prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-13 21:56 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 168+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-09-11 13:17 [v8 0/4] cgroup-aware OOM killer Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` [v8 1/4] mm, oom: refactor the oom_kill_process() function Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 20:51 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-11 20:51 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-14 13:42 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-14 13:42 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-11 13:17 ` [v8 2/4] mm, oom: cgroup-aware OOM killer Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-13 20:46 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-13 20:46 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-13 21:59 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-13 21:59 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-13 21:59 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` [v8 3/4] mm, oom: add cgroup v2 mount option for " Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 20:48 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-11 20:48 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-12 20:01 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-12 20:01 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-12 20:23 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-12 20:23 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-13 12:23 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-13 12:23 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-11 13:17 ` [v8 4/4] mm, oom, docs: describe the " Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 13:17 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-11 20:44 ` [v8 0/4] " David Rientjes 2017-09-11 20:44 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-13 12:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-13 12:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-13 20:46 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-13 20:46 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-14 13:34 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-14 13:34 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-14 20:07 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-14 20:07 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-13 21:56 ` Roman Gushchin [this message] 2017-09-13 21:56 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-14 13:40 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-14 13:40 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-14 16:05 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-14 16:05 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-15 10:58 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-15 10:58 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-15 15:23 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-15 15:23 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-15 19:55 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-15 19:55 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-15 21:08 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-15 21:08 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-18 6:20 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-18 6:20 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-18 15:02 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-18 15:02 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-18 15:02 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-21 8:30 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-21 8:30 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-19 20:54 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-19 20:54 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-20 22:24 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-20 22:24 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-21 8:27 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-21 8:27 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-18 6:16 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-18 6:16 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-19 20:51 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-19 20:51 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-18 6:14 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-18 6:14 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-20 21:53 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-20 21:53 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-20 21:53 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-25 12:24 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-25 12:24 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-25 17:00 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-25 17:00 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-25 18:15 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-25 18:15 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-25 20:25 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-25 20:25 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-25 20:25 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 10:59 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-26 10:59 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-26 11:21 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 11:21 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 12:13 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-26 12:13 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-26 12:13 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-26 13:30 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 13:30 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 17:26 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-26 17:26 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-27 3:37 ` Tim Hockin 2017-09-27 3:37 ` Tim Hockin 2017-09-27 7:43 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 7:43 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 10:19 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-27 10:19 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-27 10:19 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-27 15:35 ` Tim Hockin 2017-09-27 15:35 ` Tim Hockin 2017-09-27 16:23 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-27 16:23 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-27 18:11 ` Tim Hockin 2017-09-27 18:11 ` Tim Hockin 2017-10-01 23:29 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-01 23:29 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 11:56 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-10-02 11:56 ` Tetsuo Handa 2017-10-02 12:24 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 12:24 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 12:47 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-10-02 12:47 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-10-02 14:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 14:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 14:29 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 19:00 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 19:00 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 19:28 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 19:28 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 19:45 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 19:45 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 19:56 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 19:56 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 20:00 ` Tim Hockin 2017-10-02 20:00 ` Tim Hockin 2017-10-02 20:08 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 20:08 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 20:09 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 20:20 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 20:20 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 20:24 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 20:24 ` Shakeel Butt 2017-10-02 20:34 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-10-02 20:34 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-10-02 20:55 ` Michal Hocko 2017-10-02 20:55 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-25 22:21 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-25 22:21 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-26 8:46 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 8:46 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-26 21:04 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-26 21:04 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-27 7:37 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 7:37 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 9:57 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-27 9:57 ` Roman Gushchin 2017-09-21 14:21 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-21 14:21 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-21 21:17 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-21 21:17 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-21 21:17 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-21 21:51 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-21 21:51 ` Johannes Weiner 2017-09-22 20:53 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-22 20:53 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-22 15:44 ` Tejun Heo 2017-09-22 15:44 ` Tejun Heo 2017-09-22 15:44 ` Tejun Heo 2017-09-22 20:39 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-22 20:39 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-22 20:39 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-22 21:05 ` Tejun Heo 2017-09-22 21:05 ` Tejun Heo 2017-09-23 8:16 ` David Rientjes 2017-09-23 8:16 ` 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=20170913215607.GA19259@castle \ --to=guro@fb.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \ --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \ --cc=rientjes@google.com \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.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: linkBe 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.