[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAAKZwtfXBEe=K93J0U35aMeFaBS8eJ9yN3kRE9=+yKzNnV_Nw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 13:00:54 -0700
From: Tim Hockin <thockin@...kin.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, kernel-team@...com,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v8 0/4] cgroup-aware OOM killer
In the example above:
root
/ \
A D
/ \
B C
Does oom_group allow me to express "compare A and D; if A is chosen
compare B and C; kill the loser" ? As I understand the proposal (from
reading thread, not patch) it does not.
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon 02-10-17 12:45:18, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>> > I am sorry to cut the rest of your proposal because it simply goes over
>> > the scope of the proposed solution while the usecase you are mentioning
>> > is still possible. If we want to compare intermediate nodes (which seems
>> > to be the case) then we can always provide a knob to opt-in - be it your
>> > oom_gang or others.
>>
>> In the Roman's proposed solution we can already force the comparison
>> of intermediate nodes using 'oom_group', I am just requesting to
>> separate the killall semantics from it.
>
> oom_group _is_ about killall semantic. And comparing killable entities
> is just a natural thing to do. So I am not sure what you mean
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists