lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] mm: introduce memory.min
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 02:54:15PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 01:36:10PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > + memory.min
> > > + A read-write single value file which exists on non-root
> > > + cgroups. The default is "0".
> > > +
> > > + Hard memory protection. If the memory usage of a cgroup
> > > + is within its effective min boundary, the cgroup's memory
> > > + won't be reclaimed under any conditions. If there is no
> > > + unprotected reclaimable memory available, OOM killer
> > > + is invoked.
> >
> > What will happen if all tasks attached to a cgroup are killed by OOM,
> > but its memory usage is still within memory.min? Will memory.min be
> > ignored then?
>
> Not really.
>
> I don't think it's a big problem as long as a user isn't doing
> something weird (e.g. moving processes with significant
> amount of charged memory to other cgroups).

The user doesn't have to do anything weird for this to happen - just
read a file. This will allocate and charge page cache pages that are
not mapped to any process and hence cannot be freed by OOM killer.

>
> But what we can do here, is to ignore memory.min of empty cgroups
> (patch below), it will resolve some edge cases like this.

Makes sense to me.

Thanks,
Vladimir

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-25 12:53    [W:0.055 / U:0.932 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site