lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper
On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, Tetsuo Handa wrote:

> Maybe we all agree with introducing OOM reaper without queuing, but I do
> want to see a guarantee for scheduling for next OOM-kill operation before
> trying to build a reliable queuing chain.
>

The race can be fixed in two ways which I've already enumerated, but the
scheduling issue is tangential: the oom_reaper kthread is going to run;
increasing it's priority will only interfere with other innocent processes
that are not attached to the oom memcg hierarchy, have disjoint cpuset
mems, or are happily allocating from mempolicy nodes with free memory.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-02-03 00:21    [W:0.465 / U:0.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site