linux-kernel - Re: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] mm: oom: introduce cpuset oom

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <19779c13-2db4-8273-8c7e-69fd51f5b71f@bytedance.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:15:07 +0800
From:   Gang Li <ligang.bdlg@...edance.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:     Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] mm: oom: introduce cpuset oom

On 2022/9/23 15:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Yeah, that is possible and something to consider. One way to go about
> that is to make the selection from all cpusets with an overlap with the
> requested nodemask (probably with a preference to more constrained
> ones). In any case let's keep in mind that this is a mere heuristic. We
> just need to kill some process, it is not really feasible to aim for the
> best selection. We should just try to reduce the harm. Our exisiting
> cpuset based OOM is effectivelly random without any clear relation to
> cpusets so I would be open to experimenting in this area.

In addition to cpuset, users can also bind numa through mbind(). So I
want to manage numa binding applications that are not managed by cpuset.
Do you have any ideas?