All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	<cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [patch -mm v3 1/3] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:38:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180314123851.GB20850@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803121757080.192200@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 05:57:53PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> The cgroup aware oom killer is needlessly enforced for the entire system
> by a mount option.  It's unnecessary to force the system into a single
> oom policy: either cgroup aware, or the traditional process aware.

Can you, please, provide a real-life example, when using per-process
and cgroup-aware OOM killer depending on OOM scope is beneficial?

It might be quite confusing, depending on configuration.
>From inside a container you can have different types of OOMs,
depending on parent's cgroup configuration, which is not even
accessible for reading from inside.

Also, it's probably good to have an interface to show which policies
are available.

Thanks!

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm v3 1/3] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:38:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180314123851.GB20850@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803121757080.192200@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 05:57:53PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> The cgroup aware oom killer is needlessly enforced for the entire system
> by a mount option.  It's unnecessary to force the system into a single
> oom policy: either cgroup aware, or the traditional process aware.

Can you, please, provide a real-life example, when using per-process
and cgroup-aware OOM killer depending on OOM scope is beneficial?

It might be quite confusing, depending on configuration.
>From inside a container you can have different types of OOMs,
depending on parent's cgroup configuration, which is not even
accessible for reading from inside.

Also, it's probably good to have an interface to show which policies
are available.

Thanks!

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm v3 1/3] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:38:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180314123851.GB20850@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803121757080.192200@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 05:57:53PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> The cgroup aware oom killer is needlessly enforced for the entire system
> by a mount option.  It's unnecessary to force the system into a single
> oom policy: either cgroup aware, or the traditional process aware.

Can you, please, provide a real-life example, when using per-process
and cgroup-aware OOM killer depending on OOM scope is beneficial?

It might be quite confusing, depending on configuration.
From inside a container you can have different types of OOMs,
depending on parent's cgroup configuration, which is not even
accessible for reading from inside.

Also, it's probably good to have an interface to show which policies
are available.

Thanks!

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-14 12:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-13  0:57 [patch -mm v3 0/3] mm, memcg: introduce oom policies David Rientjes
2018-03-13  0:57 ` [patch -mm v3 1/3] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable David Rientjes
2018-03-14 12:38   ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2018-03-14 12:38     ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-14 12:38     ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-14 20:58     ` David Rientjes
2018-03-15 17:10       ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-15 17:10         ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-15 20:16         ` David Rientjes
2018-03-13  0:57 ` [patch -mm v3 2/3] mm, memcg: replace cgroup aware oom killer mount option with tunable David Rientjes
2018-03-13  0:57 ` [patch -mm v3 3/3] mm, memcg: add hierarchical usage oom policy David Rientjes
2018-03-14  0:21 ` [patch -mm] mm, memcg: evaluate root and leaf memcgs fairly on oom David Rientjes
2018-03-14 12:17   ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-14 12:17     ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-14 20:41     ` David Rientjes
2018-03-15 16:46       ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-15 16:46         ` Roman Gushchin
2018-03-15 20:01         ` David Rientjes
2018-03-15 20:34   ` [patch -mm] mm, memcg: separate oom_group from selection criteria David Rientjes
2018-03-15 20:51   ` [patch -mm] mm, memcg: disregard mempolicies for cgroup-aware oom killer David Rientjes
2018-03-15 20:54 ` [patch -mm v3 0/3] mm, memcg: introduce oom policies David Rientjes
2018-03-16 21:08   ` [patch -mm 0/6] rewrite cgroup aware oom killer for general use David Rientjes
2018-03-16 21:08     ` [patch -mm 1/6] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable David Rientjes
2018-03-16 21:08     ` [patch -mm 2/6] mm, memcg: replace cgroup aware oom killer mount option with tunable David Rientjes
2018-03-16 21:08     ` [patch -mm 3/6] mm, memcg: add hierarchical usage oom policy David Rientjes
2018-03-16 21:08     ` [patch -mm 4/6] mm, memcg: evaluate root and leaf memcgs fairly on oom David Rientjes
2018-03-18 15:00       ` kbuild test robot
2018-03-18 20:14         ` [patch -mm 4/6 updated] " David Rientjes
2018-03-18 18:18       ` [patch -mm 4/6] " kbuild test robot
2018-03-16 21:08     ` [patch -mm 5/6] mm, memcg: separate oom_group from selection criteria David Rientjes
2018-03-16 21:08     ` [patch -mm 6/6] mm, memcg: disregard mempolicies for cgroup-aware oom killer David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53     ` [patch v2 -mm 0/6] rewrite cgroup aware oom killer for general use David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53       ` [patch v2 -mm 1/6] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53       ` [patch v2 -mm 2/6] mm, memcg: replace cgroup aware oom killer mount option with tunable David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53       ` [patch v2 -mm 3/6] mm, memcg: add hierarchical usage oom policy David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53       ` [patch v2 -mm 4/6] mm, memcg: evaluate root and leaf memcgs fairly on oom David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53       ` [patch v2 -mm 5/6] mm, memcg: separate oom_group from selection criteria David Rientjes
2018-03-22 21:53       ` [patch v2 -mm 6/6] mm, memcg: disregard mempolicies for cgroup-aware oom killer David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07       ` [patch v3 -mm 0/6] rewrite cgroup aware oom killer for general use David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07         ` [patch v3 -mm 1/6] mm, memcg: introduce per-memcg oom policy tunable David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07         ` [patch v3 -mm 2/6] mm, memcg: replace cgroup aware oom killer mount option with tunable David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07         ` [patch v3 -mm 3/6] mm, memcg: add hierarchical usage oom policy David Rientjes
2018-07-16 18:16           ` Roman Gushchin
2018-07-16 18:16             ` Roman Gushchin
2018-07-17  4:06             ` David Rientjes
2018-07-23 20:33               ` David Rientjes
2018-07-23 21:28                 ` Roman Gushchin
2018-07-23 21:28                   ` Roman Gushchin
2018-07-23 23:22                   ` David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07         ` [patch v3 -mm 4/6] mm, memcg: evaluate root and leaf memcgs fairly on oom David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07         ` [patch v3 -mm 5/6] mm, memcg: separate oom_group from selection criteria David Rientjes
2018-07-13 23:07         ` [patch v3 -mm 6/6] mm, memcg: disregard mempolicies for cgroup-aware oom killer 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=20180314123851.GB20850@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com \
    --to=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --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: 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.