[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1108102106410.14230@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 21:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Mahmood Naderan <nt_mahmood@...oo.com>
cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
"\"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org\"" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: running of out memory => kernel crash
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011, Mahmood Naderan wrote:
> >If you're using cpusets or mempolicies, you must ensure that all tasks
> >attached to either of them are not set to OOM_DISABLE. It seems unlikely
> >that you're using those, so it seems like a system-wide oom condition.
>
> I didn't do that manually. What is the default behaviour? Does oom
> working or not?
>
The default behavior is to kill all eligible and unkillable threads until
there are none left to sacrifice (i.e. all kthreads and OOM_DISABLE).
> For a user process:
>
> root@srv:~# cat /proc/18564/oom_score
> 9198
> root@srv:~# cat /proc/18564/oom_adj
> 0
>
Ok, so you don't have a /proc/pid/oom_score_adj, so you're using a kernel
that predates 2.6.36.
> And for "init" process:
>
> root@srv:~# cat /proc/1/oom_score
> 17509
> root@srv:~# cat /proc/1/oom_adj
> 0
>
> Based on my understandings, in an out of memory condition (oom),
> the init process is more eligible to be killed!!!!!!! Is that right?
>
init is exempt from oom killing, it's oom_score is meaningless.
> Again I didn't get my answer yet:
> What is the default behavior of linux in an oom condition? If the default is,
> crash (kernel panic), then how can I change that in such a way to kill
> the hungry process?
>
You either have /proc/sys/vm/panic_on_oom set or it's killing a thread
that is taking down the entire machine. If it's the latter, then please
capture the kernel log and post it as Randy suggested.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists