[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181018235427.GA877@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 08:54:27 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, guro@...com,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rientjes@...gle.com, yang.s@...baba-inc.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
syzbot <syzbot+77e6b28a7a7106ad0def@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: memcontrol: Don't flood OOM messages with no
eligible task.
On (10/18/18 20:58), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >
> > A knob might do.
> > As well as /proc/sys/kernel/printk tweaks, probably. One can even add
> > echo "a b c d" > /proc/sys/kernel/printk to .bashrc and adjust printk
> > console levels on login and rollback to old values in .bash_logout
> > May be.
>
> That can work for only single login with root user case.
> Not everyone logs into console as root user.
Add sudo ;)
> It is pity that we can't send kernel messages to only selected consoles
> (e.g. all messages are sent to netconsole, but only critical messages are
> sent to local consoles).
OK, that's a fair point. There was a patch from FB, which would allow us
to set a log_level on per-console basis. So the noise goes to heav^W net
console; only critical stuff goes to the serial console (if I recall it
correctly). I'm not sure what happened to that patch, it was a while ago.
I'll try to find that out.
[..]
> That boils down to a "user interaction" problem.
> Not limiting
>
> "%s invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=%#x(%pGg), nodemask=%*pbl, order=%d, oom_score_adj=%hd\n"
> "Out of memory and no killable processes...\n"
>
> is very annoying.
>
> And I really can't understand why Michal thinks "handling this requirement" as
> "make the code more complex than necessary and squash different things together".
Michal is trying very hard to address the problem in a reasonable way.
The problem you are talking about is not MM specific. You can have a
faulty SCSI device, corrupted FS, and so and on.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists