[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170604193954.GC19980@esperanza>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 22:39:54 +0300
From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
kernel-team@...com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 5/7] mm, oom: introduce oom_score_adj for memory
cgroups
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 07:35:13PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Introduce a per-memory-cgroup oom_score_adj setting.
> A read-write single value file which exits on non-root
> cgroups. The default is "0".
>
> It will have a similar meaning to a per-process value,
> available via /proc/<pid>/oom_score_adj.
> Should be in a range [-1000, 1000].
IMHO OOM scoring (not only the user API, but the logic as well) should
be introduced by a separate patch following the main one (#6) in the
series. Rationale: we might want to commit the main patch right away,
while postponing OOM scoring for later, because some people might find
the API controversial and needing a further, deeper discussion.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists