linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] memcg: oom kill handling improvement

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20100226144752.19734ff0.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Date:	Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:47:52 +0900
From:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	rientjes@...gle.com, nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] memcg: oom kill handling improvement

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:23:39 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:15:52 +0900
> Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:59:21 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > These are dump of patches just for showing concept, what I want to do.
> > > But not tested. please see if you have free time. (you can ignore ;)
> > > 
> > > Anyway, this will HUNK to the latest mmotm, Kirill's work is merged.
> > > 
> > > This is not related to David's work. I don't hesitate to rebase mine
> > > to the mmotm if his one is merged, it's easy.
> > > But I'm not sure his one goes to mm soon. 
> > > 
> > > 1st patch is for better handling oom-kill under memcg.
> > It's bigger than I expected, but it basically looks good to me.
> > 
> 
> BTW, do you think we need quick fix ? I can't think of a very easy/small fix
> which is very correct...
To be honest, yes.
IMHO, casing global oom because of memcg's oom is a very bad behavior
in the sence of resource isolation. But I agree it's hard to fix in simple way,
so leave it as it is for now..
hmm.. I must admit that I've not done enough oom test under very high pressure.


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
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/