linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] OOM Debug print selection and additional information

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]

Date:   Thu, 29 Aug 2019 18:17:59 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Edward Chron <echron@...sta.com>
Cc:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ivan Delalande <colona@...sta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] OOM Debug print selection and additional
 information

On Thu 29-08-19 08:03:19, Edward Chron wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 4:56 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
[...]
> > Or simply provide a hook with the oom_control to be called to report
> > without replacing the whole oom killer behavior. That is not necessary.
> 
> For very simple addition, to add a line of output this works.

Why would a hook be limited to small stuff?

> It would still be nice to address the fact the existing OOM Report prints
> all of the user processes or none. It would be nice to add some control
> for that. That's what we did.

TBH, I am not really convinced partial taks list is desirable nor easy
to configure. What is the criterion? oom_score (with potentially unstable
metric)? Rss? Something else?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs