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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20170914134014.wqemev2kgychv7m5@dhcp22.suse.cz> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:40:14 +0200 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> To: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, 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 Subject: Re: [v8 0/4] cgroup-aware OOM killer On Wed 13-09-17 14:56:07, Roman Gushchin wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 02:29:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > I strongly believe that comparing only leaf memcgs > > is more straightforward and it doesn't lead to unexpected results as > > mentioned before (kill a small memcg which is a part of the larger > > sub-hierarchy). > > One of two main goals of this patchset is to introduce cgroup-level > fairness: bigger cgroups should be affected more than smaller, > despite the size of tasks inside. I believe the same principle > should be used for cgroups. Yes bigger cgroups should be preferred but I fail to see why bigger hierarchies should be considered as well if they are not kill-all. And whether non-leaf memcgs should allow kill-all is not entirely clear to me. What would be the usecase? Consider that it might be not your choice (as a user) how deep is your leaf memcg. I can already see how people complain that their memcg has been killed just because it was one level deeper in the hierarchy... I would really start simple and only allow kill-all on leaf memcgs and only compare leaf memcgs & root. If we ever need to kill whole hierarchies then allow kill-all on intermediate memcgs as well and then consider cumulative consumptions only on those that have kill-all enabled. Or do I miss any reasonable usecase that would suffer from such a semantic? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists