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]
Message-ID: <bcf6d15f-cbdb-8c45-6087-a0f2aab737c6@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date:   Wed, 29 Apr 2020 19:45:07 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: stop reclaiming if GFP_ATOMIC will start failing
 soon

On 2020/04/29 18:04, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Completely agreed! The in kernel OOM killer is to deal with situations
> when memory is desperately depleted without any sign of a forward
> progress. If there is a reclaimable memory then we are not there yet.
> If a workload can benefit from early oom killing based on response time
> then we have facilities to achieve that (e.g. PSI).

Can PSI work even if userspace process cannot avoid reclaimable memory
allocations (e.g. page fault, file read) is already stalling? I'm not sure
whether PSI allows responding quickly enough to "keep reclaimable memory
allocations not to reclaim" despite there is still reclaimable memory...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ