linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: use rss value instead of vm size for badness

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:20:08 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc:	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
	vedran.furac@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: use rss value instead of vm size for badness

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> > The purpose of /proc/pid/oom_adj is not always to polarize the heuristic 
> > for the task it represents, it allows userspace to define when a task is 
> > rogue.  Working with total_vm as a baseline, it is simple to use the 
> > interface to tune the heuristic to prefer a certain task over another when 
> > its memory consumption goes beyond what is expected.  With this interface, 
> > I can easily define when an application should be oom killed because it is 
> > using far more memory than expected.  I can also disable oom killing 
> > completely for it, if necessary.  Unless you have a consistent baseline 
> > for all tasks, the adjustment wouldn't contextually make any sense.  Using 
> > rss does not allow users to statically define when a task is rogue and is 
> > dependent on the current state of memory at the time of oom.
> > 
> > I would support removing most of the other heuristics other than the 
> > baseline and the nodes intersection with mems_allowed to prefer tasks in 
> > the same cpuset, though, to make it easier to understand and tune.
> 
> I feel you talked about oom_adj doesn't fit your use case. probably you need
> /proc/{pid}/oom_priority new knob. oom adjustment doesn't fit you.
> you need job severity based oom killing order. severity doesn't depend on any
> hueristic.
> server administrator should know job severity on his system.
> 

That's the complete opposite of what I wrote above, we use oom_adj to 
define when a user application is considered "rogue," meaning that it is 
using far more memory than expected and so we want it killed.  As you 
mentioned weeks ago, the kernel cannot identify a memory leaker; this is 
the user interface to allow the oom killer to identify a memory-hogging 
rogue task that will (probably) consume all system memory eventually.  
The way oom_adj is implemented, with a bit shift on a baseline of 
total_vm, it can also polarize the badness heuristic to kill an 
application based on priority by examining /proc/pid/oom_score, but that 
wasn't my concern in this case.  Using rss as a baseline reduces my 
ability to tune oom_adj appropriately to identify those rogue tasks 
because it is highly dynamic depending on the state of the VM at the time 
of oom.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/