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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 12:04:56 +0900 From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: stop reclaiming if GFP_ATOMIC will start failing soon On 2020/04/26 9:27, Andrew Morton wrote: > Well, what's really going on here? > > Is networking potentially consuming an unbounded amount of memory? If > so, then killing a process will just cause networking to consume more > memory then hit against the same thing. So presumably the answer is > "no, the watermarks are inappropriately set for this workload". Maybe somebody is abusing __GFP_MEMALLOC allocations. David, please include whole context (e.g. which function from which process) instead of only memory stat lines.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists