[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0911031224270.25890@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:29:39 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
minchan.kim@...il.com, vedran.furac@...il.com,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm][PATCH 5/6] oom-killer: check last total_vm
expansion
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>
> At considering oom-kill algorithm, we can't avoid to take runtime
> into account. But this can adds too big bonus to slow-memory-leaker.
> For adding penalty to slow-memory-leaker, we record jiffies of
> the last mm->hiwater_vm expansion. That catches processes which leak
> memory periodically.
>
No, it doesn't, it simply measures the last time the hiwater mark was
increased. That could have increased by a single page in the last tick
with no increase in memory consumption over the past year and then its
unfairly biased against for quiet_time in the new oom kill heuristic
(patch 6). Using this as part of the badness scoring is ill conceived
because it doesn't necessarily indicate a memory leaking task, just one
that has recently allocated memory.
--
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