| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090729150443.GB1534@ucw.cz> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:04:44 +0200 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already (v3) On Wed 2009-07-15 23:53:18, Rik van Riel wrote: > When way too many processes go into direct reclaim, it is possible > for all of the pages to be taken off the LRU. One result of this > is that the next process in the page reclaim code thinks there are > no reclaimable pages left and triggers an out of memory kill. > > One solution to this problem is to never let so many processes into > the page reclaim path that the entire LRU is emptied. Limiting the > system to only having half of each inactive list isolated for > reclaim should be safe. Is this still racy? Like on 100cpu machine, with LRU size of 50...? -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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