[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912142100240.436@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:03:07 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with nodemask
v4.2
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> To compare vsz is only meaningful when the same program are compared.
> But oom killer don't. To compare vsz between another program DONT detect
> any memory leak.
>
You're losing the ability to detect that memory leak because you'd be
using a baseline that userspace cannot possibly know at the time of oom.
You cannot possibly insist that users understand the amount of resident
memory for all applications when tuning the heuristic adjuster from
userspace.
In other words, how do you plan on userspace being able to identify tasks
that are memory leakers if you change the baseline to rss? Unless you
have an answer to this question, you're not admitting the problem that
the oom killer is primarily designed to address.
--
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