From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm 08/18] oom: badness heuristic rewrite
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 11:56:48 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006011144340.32024@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100601074620.GR9453@laptop>
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > This a complete rewrite of the oom killer's badness() heuristic which is
> > used to determine which task to kill in oom conditions. The goal is to
> > make it as simple and predictable as possible so the results are better
> > understood and we end up killing the task which will lead to the most
> > memory freeing while still respecting the fine-tuning from userspace.
>
> Do you have particular ways of testing this (and other heuristics
> changes such as the forkbomb detector)?
>
Yes, the patch prior to this one in the series, "oom: enable oom tasklist
dump by default", allows you to examine the oom_score_adj of all eligible
tasks. Used in combination with /proc/pid/oom_score, which reports the
result of the badness heuristic to userspace, I tested the result of the
change by ensuring that it worked as intended. Since we'll now see a
tasklist dump of all eligible tasks whenever someone reports an oom
problem (hopefully fewer reports as a result of this rewrite than
currently!), it's much easier to determine (i) why the oom killer was
called, and (ii) why a particular task was chosen for kill. That's been
my testing philosophy.
The forkbomb detector does add a minimal bias to tasks that have a large
number of execve children, just as the current oom killer does (although
the bias is much smaller with my heursitic). Rik and I had a lengthy
conversation on linux-mm about that when it was first proposed. The key
to that particular bias is that you must remember that even though a task
is selected for oom kill that the oom killer still attempts to kill an
execve child first. So the end result is that an important system daemon,
such as a webserver, doesn't actually get oom killed when it's selected as
a result of this, but it's more of a bias toward the children to be killed
(a client) instead. We're guaranteed that a child will be killed if a
task is chosen as the result of a tiebreaker because of the forkbomb
detector because it surely has a child with a different mm that is
eligible. This isn't meant to be enforce a kernel-wide forkbomb policy,
which would obviously be better implemented elsewhere, but rather bias the
children when a parent is forking an egregiously large number of tasks.
"Egregious" in this case is defined as whatever the user uses for
oom_forkbomb_thres, which I believe defaults to a sane value of 1000.
> Such that you can look at your test case or workload and see that
> it is really improved?
>
I'm glad you asked that because some recent conversation has been
slightly confusing to me about how this affects the desktop; this rewrite
significantly improves the oom killer's response for desktop users. The
core ideas were developed in the thread from this mailing list back in
February called "Improving OOM killer" at
http://marc.info/?t=126506191200004&r=4&w=2 -- users constantly report
that vital system tasks such as kdeinit are killed whenever a memory
hogging task is forked either intentionally or unintentionally. I argued
for a while that KDE should be taking proper precautions by adjusting its
own oom_adj score and that of its forked children as it's an inherited
value, but I was eventually convinced that an overall improvement to the
heuristic must be made to kill a task that was known to free a large
amount of memory that is resident in RAM and that we have a consistent way
of defining oom priorities when a task is run uncontained and when it is a
member of a memcg or cpuset (or even mempolicy now), even in the case when
it's contained out from under the task's knowledge. When faced with
memory pressure from an out of control or memory hogging task on the
desktop, the oom killer now kills it instead of a vital task such as an X
server (and oracle, webserver, etc on server platforms) because of the use
of the task's rss instead of total_vm statistic.
--
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:[~2010-06-01 18:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-01 7:18 [patch -mm 00/18] oom killer rewrite David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 01/18] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:20 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:37 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-13 11:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-17 3:33 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-21 11:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-21 11:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:43 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 23:25 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-08 23:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-09 0:06 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-09 1:07 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-13 11:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 02/18] oom: sacrifice child with highest badness score for parent David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:41 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-13 11:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-14 8:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-14 11:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:45 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 03/18] oom: select task from tasklist for mempolicy ooms David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 23:28 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 04/18] oom: extract panic helper function David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:33 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 05/18] oom: remove special handling for pagefault ooms David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 06/18] oom: move sysctl declarations to oom.h David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 07/18] oom: enable oom tasklist dump by default David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:36 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 08/18] oom: badness heuristic rewrite David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:36 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 18:44 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 13:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-02 21:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03 23:10 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-03 23:53 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-04 0:04 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-04 0:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-04 5:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-04 9:22 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-04 9:19 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-04 9:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-04 10:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-04 20:57 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 23:47 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-17 3:28 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:46 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-01 18:56 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2010-06-02 13:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-02 21:23 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03 0:05 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-03 6:44 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03 3:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-03 6:48 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03 23:15 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-04 10:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 09/18] oom: add forkbomb penalty to badness heuristic David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:37 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 18:57 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03 20:33 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 10/18] oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:37 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 11/18] oom: avoid oom killer for lowmem allocations David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:38 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:18 ` [patch -mm 12/18] oom: remove unnecessary code and cleanup David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:40 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 18:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:19 ` [patch -mm 13/18] oom: avoid race for oom killed tasks detaching mm prior to exit David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:40 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 18:59 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01 20:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-01 21:19 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 0:28 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-02 9:49 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 10:46 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-02 21:35 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 13:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:19 ` [patch -mm 14/18] oom: check PF_KTHREAD instead of !mm to skip kthreads David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:19 ` [patch -mm 15/18] oom: introduce find_lock_task_mm() to fix !mm false positives David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:19 ` [patch -mm 16/18] oom: give current access to memory reserves if it has been killed David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:44 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 7:19 ` [patch -mm 17/18] oom: avoid sending exiting tasks a SIGKILL David Rientjes
2010-06-01 7:19 ` [patch -mm 18/18] oom: clean up oom_kill_task() 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=alpine.DEB.2.00.1006011144340.32024@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.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.