linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] prevent incorrect oom under split

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]

Message-Id: <1214395885.15232.17.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:11:25 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Takenori Nagano <t-nagano@...jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] prevent incorrect oom under split_lru

On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 15:56 +0900, MinChan Kim wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 3:08 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > Hi Kim-san,
> >
> >> >> So, if priority==0, We should try to reclaim all page for prevent OOM.
> >> >
> >> > You are absolutely right.  Good catch.
> >>
> >> I have a concern about application latency.
> >> If lru list have many pages, it take a very long time to scan pages.
> >> More system have many ram, More many time to scan pages.
> >
> > No problem.
> >
> > priority==0 indicate emergency.
> > it doesn't happend on typical workload.
> >
> 
> I see :)
> 
> But if such emergency happen in embedded system, application can't be
> executed for some time.
> I am not sure how long time it take.
> But In some application, schedule period is very important than memory
> reclaim latency.
> 
> Now, In your patch, when such emergency happen, it continue to reclaim
> page until it will scan entire page of lru list.
> It

IMHO embedded real-time apps shoud mlockall() and not do anything that
can result in memory allocations in their fast (deterministic) paths.

The much more important case is desktop usage - that is where we run non
real-time code, but do expect 'low' latency due to user-interaction.

>>From hitting swap on my 512M laptop (rather frequent occurance) I know
we can do better here,..

--
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/