linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: count global and memory cgroup oom kills

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: <CALo0P10LM4LYWidrNKGkw=6Bcrq198gmwPbpUBD7yt4C=jJ0pQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2017 19:05:51 +0100
From:   Roman Guschin <guroan@...il.com>
To:     Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: count global and memory cgroup oom kills

2017-05-22 10:11 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>:
>
>
> On 19.05.2017 19:34, Roman Guschin wrote:
>>
>> 2017-05-19 15:22 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Khlebnikov
>> <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>:
>>  From a user's point of view the difference between "oom" and "max"
>> becomes really vague here,
>> assuming that "max" is described almost in the same words:
>>
>> "The number of times the cgroup's memory usage was
>> about to go over the max boundary.  If direct reclaim
>> fails to bring it down, the OOM killer is invoked."
>>
>> I wonder, if it's better to fix the existing "oom" value  to show what
>> it has to show, according to docs,
>> rather than to introduce a new one?
>>
>
> Nope, they are different. I think we should rephase documentation somehow
>
> low - count of reclaims below low level
> high - count of post-allocation reclaims above high level
> max - count of direct reclaims
> oom - count of failed direct reclaims
> oom_kill - count of oom killer invocations and killed processes

Definitely worth it.

Also, I would prefer to reserve "oom" for number of oom victims,
and introduce something like "reclaim_failed".
It will be consistent with existing vmstat.

Thanks!