[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 11:10:42 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, hannes@...xchg.org,
bsingharora@...il.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vdavydov@...allels.com, tj@...nel.org,
handai.szj@...bao.com, oleg@...hat.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] oom: Be less verbose if the oom_control event fd
has listeners
On Thu 05-06-14 14:01:02, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > If we are printing too much then OK, let's remove those parts which are
> > not that useful but hiding information which tells us more about the oom
> > decision doesn't sound right to me.
> >
>
> Memcg oom killer printing is controlled mostly by
> mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(), I don't see anything in the generic oom
> killer that should be removed and that I have not used even for memcg ooms
> in the past.
Yes, I find most of the information printed during OOM very helpful.
After 58cf188ed649 (memcg, oom: provide more precise dump info while
memcg oom happening) even memcg oom info is helpful.
> Perhaps there could be a case made for suppressing some of the
> hierarchical stats from being printed for memcg ooms and controlled by
> another memcg knob, but it doesn't sound vital.
Agreed.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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