linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH mmotm] vmscan: handle may_swap more strictly (Re: [PATCH mmotm] vmscan: fix may

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090609173605.DD82.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Tue,  9 Jun 2009 17:37:23 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mmotm] vmscan: handle may_swap more strictly (Re: [PATCH  mmotm] vmscan: fix may_swap handling for memcg)

> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:24 PM, KOSAKI
> Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:58 PM, KOSAKI
> >> Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >> >> Hi, KOSAKI.
> >> >>
> >> >> As you know, this problem caused by if condition(priority) in shrink_zone.
> >> >> Let me have a question.
> >> >>
> >> >> Why do we have to prevent scan value calculation when the priority is zero ?
> >> >> As I know, before split-lru, we didn't do it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there any specific issue in case of the priority is zero ?
> >> >
> >> > Yes.
> >> >
> >> > example:
> >> >
> >> > get_scan_ratio() return anon:80%, file=20%. and the system have
> >> > 10000 anon pages and 10000 file pages.
> >> >
> >> > shrink_zone() picked up 8000 anon pages and 2000 file pages.
> >> > it mean 8000 file pages aren't scanned at all.
> >> >
> >> > Oops, it can makes OOM-killer although system have droppable file cache.
> >> >
> >> Hmm..Can that problem be happen in real system ?
> >> The file ratio is big means that file lru list scanning is so big but
> >> rotate is small.
> >> It means file lru have few reclaimable page.
> >>
> >> Isn't it ? I am confusing.
> >> Could you elaborate, please if you don't mind ?
> >
> > hm, ok, my example was wrong.
> > I intention is, if there are droppable file-back pages (althout only 1 page),
> > OOM-killer shouldn't occuer.
> >
> > many or few is unrelated.
> >
> 
> I am not sure that is effective.
> Have you ever met this problem in real situation ?

No.
It's only stress workload issue. but VM subsystem sould work on
stress workload, I think.


> BTW, I have to dive into code. :)
> Thanks for spending valuable time for commenting





--
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/