[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090515185745.GJ4451@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 00:27:45 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
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>
Subject: Re: Misleading OOM messages
* Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> [2009-05-15 11:23:27]:
> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 13:58 -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 May 2009, David Rientjes wrote:
> > > > To me it at least adds the fact that more should be made *available* and
> > > > not just that you're out of it. So, definitely not perfect, but better
> > > > than "out".
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think "no allowable memory" followed by information on what is and is
> > > not allowed in that specific context would remove any ambiguity.
> >
> > Useful information to have. If a NUMA or cgroup restriction caused the
> > failure then we should print that out.
>
> 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.
>
Also look at mem_cgroup_print_oom_info().
--
Balbir
--
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