[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aXh_LpTzDhvv20uB@tiehlicka>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 10:02:38 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>,
JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/17] mm: BPF OOM
On Mon 26-01-26 18:44:03, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> This patchset adds an ability to customize the out of memory
> handling using bpf.
>
> It focuses on two parts:
> 1) OOM handling policy,
> 2) PSI-based OOM invocation.
>
> The idea to use bpf for customizing the OOM handling is not new, but
> unlike the previous proposal [1], which augmented the existing task
> ranking policy, this one tries to be as generic as possible and
> leverage the full power of the modern bpf.
>
> It provides a generic interface which is called before the existing OOM
> killer code and allows implementing any policy, e.g. picking a victim
> task or memory cgroup or potentially even releasing memory in other
> ways, e.g. deleting tmpfs files (the last one might require some
> additional but relatively simple changes).
Are you planning to write any highlevel documentation on how to use the
existing infrastructure to implement proper/correct OOM handlers with
these generic interfaces?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists