linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	"Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Arve Hjønnevåg" <arve@android.com>,
	"Riley Andrews" <riandrews@android.com>,
	devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com>,
	"Android Kernel Team" <kernel-team@android.com>,
	"Martijn Coenen" <maco@google.com>,
	"Rom Lemarchand" <romlem@google.com>,
	"Tim Murray" <timmurray@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging, android: remove lowmemory killer from the tree
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:28:53 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHRSSEzvcmc3JMc=CnzBeUVWy2t=DD2WgnysmaHP1fp9B80Aug@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANcMJZBNe10dtK8ANtLSWS3UXeePhndN=S5otADhQdfQKOAhOw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2362 bytes --]

+timmurray

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:24 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> >
> > Lowmemory killer is sitting in the staging tree since 2008 without any
> > serious interest for fixing issues brought up by the MM folks. The main
> > objection is that the implementation is basically broken by design:
> >         - it hooks into slab shrinker API which is not suitable for this
> >           purpose. lowmem_count implementation just shows this nicely.
> >           There is no scaling based on the memory pressure and no
> >           feedback to the generic shrinker infrastructure.
> >           Moreover lowmem_scan is called way too often for the heavy
> >           work it performs.
> >         - it is not reclaim context aware - no NUMA and/or memcg
> >           awareness.
> >
> > As the code stands right now it just adds a maintenance overhead when
> > core MM changes have to update lowmemorykiller.c as well. It also seems
> > that the alternative LMK implementation will be solely in the userspace
> > so this code has no perspective it seems. The staging tree is supposed
> > to be for a code which needs to be put in shape before it can be merged
> > which is not the case here obviously.
>
> So, just for context, Android does have a userland LMK daemon (using
> the mempressure notifiers) as you mentioned, but unfortunately I'm
> unaware of any devices that ship with that implementation.
>
> This is reportedly because while the mempressure notifiers provide a
> the signal to userspace, the work the deamon then has to do to look up
> per process memory usage, in order to figure out who is best to kill
> at that point was too costly and resulted in poor device performance.
>
> So for shipping Android devices, the LMK is still needed. However, its
> not critical for basic android development, as the system will
> function without it. Additionally I believe most vendors heavily
> customize the LMK in their vendor tree, so the value of having it in
> staging might be relatively low.
>
> It would be great however to get a discussion going here on what the
> ulmkd needs from the kernel in order to efficiently determine who best
> to kill, and how we might best implement that.
>
> thanks
> -john
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3046 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-23 20:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-22 12:01 [PATCH] staging, android: remove lowmemory killer from the tree Michal Hocko
2017-02-23 20:24 ` John Stultz
2017-02-23 20:28   ` Todd Kjos [this message]
2017-02-23 20:36   ` Martijn Coenen
2017-02-24  9:34     ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-24 18:38       ` Tim Murray
2017-02-24 18:42         ` Rom Lemarchand
2017-03-04  2:06           ` Tim Murray
2017-02-24 12:19     ` peter enderborg
2017-02-24 12:28       ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-24 13:16         ` peter enderborg
2017-02-24 14:11           ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-24 14:42             ` peter enderborg
2017-02-24 15:03               ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-24 15:40                 ` peter enderborg
2017-02-24 15:52                   ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-24  9:38   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-09  9:15 ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-09  9:30   ` Greg KH
2017-03-09 10:00     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-09 12:48       ` Greg KH

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='CAHRSSEzvcmc3JMc=CnzBeUVWy2t=DD2WgnysmaHP1fp9B80Aug@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=tkjos@google.com \
    --cc=arve@android.com \
    --cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=maco@google.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=riandrews@android.com \
    --cc=romlem@google.com \
    --cc=timmurray@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).