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: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709070939340.19539@nuc-kabylake>
Date:   Thu, 7 Sep 2017 09:43:30 -0500 (CDT)
From:   Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:     David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, nzimmer@....com, holt@....com,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, kernel-team@...com,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sivanich@....com
Subject: Re: [v7 5/5] mm, oom: cgroup v2 mount option to disable cgroup-aware
 OOM killer

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017, David Rientjes wrote:

> > The oom_kill_allocating_task sysctl which causes the OOM killer
> > to simple kill the allocating task is useless. Killing the random
> > task is not the best idea.
> >
> > Nobody likes it, and hopefully nobody uses it.
> > We want to completely deprecate it at some point.
> >
>
> SGI required it when it was introduced simply to avoid the very expensive
> tasklist scan.  Adding Christoph Lameter to the cc since he was involved
> back then.

Really? From what I know and worked on way back when: The reason was to be
able to contain the affected application in a cpuset. Multiple apps may
have been running in multiple cpusets on a large NUMA machine and the OOM
condition in one cpuset should not affect the other. It also helped to
isolate the application behavior causing the oom in numerous cases.

Doesnt this requirement transfer to cgroups in the same way?

Left SGI in 2008 so adding Dimitri who may know about the current
situation. Robin Holt also left SGI as far as I know.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ