[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0905151235220.925@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
San Mehat <san@...roid.com>, Arve Hj?nnev?g <arve@...roid.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Misleading OOM messages
On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dave Hansen wrote:
> We get a wee bit of info out for the cgroups case at least:
>
> void mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *mem, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> ...
> if (oom_kill_process(p, gfp_mask, 0, points, mem,
> "Memory cgroup out of memory"))
> goto retry;
>
> That can surely be improved, but it's a decent start.
>
Cpusets are also cgroups and have their own oom handling logic
(CONSTRAINT_CPUSET and the penalization of the badness score for not
sharing memory with current's set of allowed nodes). In this case, we're
interested in only the nodes set in cpuset_current_mems_allowed, for
instance, and not the entire state of the machine for exclusive cpusets.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists