linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm, oom_reaper: report success/failure

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:	Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:26:40 +0100
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Andrea Argangeli <andrea@...nel.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm, oom_reaper: report success/failure

On Thu 04-02-16 14:31:26, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 
> > > I think it would be helpful to show anon-rss after reaping, however, so we 
> > > can compare to the previous anon-rss that was reported.  And, I agree that 
> > > leaving behind a message in the kernel log that reaping has been 
> > > successful is worthwhile.  So this line should just show what anon-rss is 
> > > after reaping and make it clear that this is not the memory reaped.
> > 
> > Does
> > "oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s) current memory anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB "
> > 
> > sound any better?
> 
> oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB
> 
> would probably be better until additional support is added to do other 
> kinds of reaping other than just primarily heap.  This should help to 
> quantify the exact amount of memory that could be reaped (or otherwise 
> unmapped) iff oom_reaper has to get involved rather than fluctations that 
> have nothing to do with it.

---
>From 402090df64de7f80d7d045b0b17e860220837fa6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:24:23 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] mm-oom_reaper-report-success-failure-fix

update the log message to be more specific

Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
---
 mm/oom_kill.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 87d644c97ac9..ca61e6cfae52 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ static bool __oom_reap_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
 		}
 	}
 	tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, 0, -1);
-	pr_info("oom_reaper: reaped process :%d (%s) anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lulB\n",
+	pr_info("oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lulB\n",
 			task_pid_nr(tsk), tsk->comm,
 			K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_ANONPAGES)),
 			K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_FILEPAGES)),
-- 
2.7.0


-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs