From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, rientjes@google.com,
llong@redhat.com, neelx@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/oom_kill: show oom eligibility when displaying the current memory state of all tasks
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:32:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210803103222.wethf6pj3rh2b2uq@ava.usersys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YQjq1mXDXcS1CMMO@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Tue 2021-08-03 09:05 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> There were some attempts to print oom_score during OOM. E.g.
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190808183247.28206-1-echron@arista.com. That
> one was rejected on the grounds that the number on its own doesn't
> really present any real value. It is really only valuable when comparing
> to other potential oom victims. I have to say I am still worried about
> printing this internal scoring as it should have really been an
> implementation detail but with /proc/<pid>/oom_score this is likely a
> lost battle and I am willing to give up on that front.
Understood.
> I am still not entirely convinced this is worth doing though.
> oom_badness is not a cheap operation. task_lock has to be taken again
> during dump_tasks for each task so the already quite expensive operation
> will be more so. Is this really something we cannot live without?
Fair enough and I now agree, it is unquestionably not worth it.
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-03 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-30 16:20 [PATCH v3] mm/oom_kill: show oom eligibility when displaying the current memory state of all tasks Aaron Tomlin
2021-08-01 20:01 ` Andrew Morton
2021-08-02 3:49 ` David Rientjes
2021-08-02 14:50 ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-08-02 6:34 ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-02 15:12 ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-08-03 7:05 ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-03 10:32 ` Aaron Tomlin [this message]
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=20210803103222.wethf6pj3rh2b2uq@ava.usersys.com \
--to=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=neelx@redhat.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).