[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52F9A1D8.7040301@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:06:48 +0800
From: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@...wei.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [question] how to figure out OOM reason? should dump slab/vmalloc
info when OOM?
On 2014/1/22 4:41, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Jianguo Wu wrote:
>
>>> The problem is that slabinfo becomes excessively verbose and dumping it
>>> all to the kernel log often times causes important messages to be lost.
>>> This is why we control things like the tasklist dump with a VM sysctl. It
>>> would be possible to dump, say, the top ten slab caches with the highest
>>> memory usage, but it will only be helpful for slab leaks. Typically there
>>> are better debugging tools available than analyzing the kernel log; if you
>>> see unusually high slab memory in the meminfo dump, you can enable it.
>>>
>>
>> But, when OOM has happened, we can only use kernel log, slab/vmalloc info from proc
>> is stale. Maybe we can dump slab/vmalloc with a VM sysctl, and only top 10/20 entrys?
>>
>
> You could, but it's a tradeoff between how much to dump to a general
> resource such as the kernel log and how many sysctls we add that control
> every possible thing. Slab leaks would definitely be a minority of oom
> conditions and you should normally be able to reproduce them by running
> the same workload; just use slabtop(1) or manually inspect /proc/slabinfo
> while such a workload is running for indicators. I don't think we want to
> add the information by default, though, nor do we want to add sysctls to
> control the behavior (you'd still need to reproduce the issue after
> enabling it).
>
> We are currently discussing userspace oom handlers, though, that would
> allow you to run a process that would be notified and allowed to allocate
> a small amount of memory on oom conditions. It would then be trivial to
> dump any information you feel pertinent in userspace prior to killing
> something. I like to inspect heap profiles for memory hogs while
> debugging our malloc() issues, for example, and you could look more
> closely at kernel memory.
>
> I'll cc you on future discussions of that feature.
>
Hi David,
Thanks for your kindly explanation, do you have any specific plans on this?
Thanks,
Jianguo Wu.
>
--
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