lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Feb]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] 3.10 kernel- oom with about 24G free memory
From
Date
Hi Michal,

Thanks for comment!
On 2017/2/10 16:52, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 10-02-17 16:48:58, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>> Hi Michal,
>>
>> Thanks for comment!
>> On 2017/2/10 15:09, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Fri 10-02-17 09:13:58, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>>>> hi Michal,
>>>> Thanks for your comment.
>>>>
>>>> On 2017/2/9 21:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>>>>> OK, so this is a memcg OOM killer which panics because the configuration
>>>>>> says so. The OOM report doesn't say so and that is the bug. dump_header
>>>>>> is memcg aware and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory initializes oom_control
>>>>>> properly. Is this Vanilla kernel?
>>>>
>>>> That means we should raise the limit of that memcg to avoid memcg OOM killer, right?
>>>
>>> Why do you configure the system to panic on memcg OOM in the first
>>> place. This is a wrong thing to do in 99% of cases.
>>
>> For our production think it should use reboot to recovery the system when OOM,
>> instead of killing user's key process. Maybe not the right thing.
>
> I can understand that for the global oom killer but not for memcg. You
> can recover the oom even without killing any process. You can simply
> increase the limit from the userspace when the oom event is triggered.
So you mean set oom_kill_disable and increase the limit from userspace
when memcg under_oom, right?

Thanks
Yisheng Xie.
>
> Trigerring the panic on memcg oom killer is both dangerous and most
> probably something you do not want.
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-02-10 10:22    [W:0.043 / U:3.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site