lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] introduce memory.oom.group
On Tue 07-08-18 15:34:58, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>
> > > In a cgroup-aware oom killer world, yes, we need the ability to specify
> > > that the usage of the entire subtree should be compared as a single
> > > entity with other cgroups. That is necessary for user subtrees but may
> > > not be necessary for top-level cgroups depending on how you structure your
> > > unified cgroup hierarchy. So it needs to be configurable, as you suggest,
> > > and you are correct it can be different than oom.group.
> > >
> > > That's not the only thing we need though, as I'm sure you were expecting
> > > me to say :)
> > >
> > > We need the ability to preserve existing behavior, i.e. process based and
> > > not cgroup aware, for subtrees so that our users who have clear
> > > expectations and tune their oom_score_adj accordingly based on how the oom
> > > killer has always chosen processes for oom kill do not suddenly regress.
> >
> > Isn't the combination of oom.group=0 and oom.evaluate_together=1 describing
> > this case? This basically means that if memcg is selected as target,
> > the process inside will be selected using traditional per-process approach.
> >
>
> No, that would overload the policy and mechanism. We want the ability to
> consider user-controlled subtrees as a single entity for comparison with
> other user subtrees to select which subtree to target. This does not
> imply that users want their entire subtree oom killed.

Yeah, that's why oom.group == 0, no?

Anyway, can we separate this discussion from the current series please?
We are getting more and more tangent.

Or do you still see the current state to be not mergeable?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-08 12:59    [W:0.078 / U:5.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site