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: <e444e0ca-a2ff-37f2-1f1a-032b9fd63235@bytedance.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Apr 2023 11:22:16 +0800
From:   Gang Li <ligang.bdlg@...edance.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     rientjes@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: oom: introduce cpuset oom


On 2023/4/4 22:31, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [CC cpuset people]
> 
> The oom report should be explicit about this being CPUSET specific oom
> handling so unexpected behavior could be nailed down to this change so I
Yes, the oom message looks like this:

```
[   65.470256] 
oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_CPUSET,nodemask=(null),cpuset=test,mems_allowed=0,global_oom,task_memcg=/user.slice/user-0.slice/session-4.scope,task=memkiller,pid=1968,uid=0
Apr  4 09:08:53 debian kernel: [   65.481992] Out of memory: Killed 
process 1968 (memkiller) total-vm:2099436kB, anon-rss:1971712kB, 
file-rss:1024kB, shmem-rss:0kB, UID:0 pgtables:3904kB oom_score_adj:0
```


> do not see a major concern from the oom POV. Nevertheless it would be
> still good to consider whether this should be an opt-in behavior. I
> personally do not see a major problem because most cpuset deployments I
> have seen tend to be well partitioned so the new behavior makes more
> sense.
> 

Since memcgroup oom is mandatory, cpuset oom should preferably be 
mandatory as well. But we can still consider adding an option to user.

How about introduce `/proc/sys/vm/oom_in_cpuset`?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ