lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [RFC] Per file OOM badness
    From
    Date
    Am 24.01.2018 um 12:50 schrieb Michal Hocko:
    > On Wed 24-01-18 12:23:10, Michel Dänzer wrote:
    >> On 2018-01-24 12:01 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
    >>> On Wed 24-01-18 11:27:15, Michel Dänzer wrote:
    > [...]
    >>>> 2. If the OOM killer kills a process which is sharing BOs with another
    >>>> process, this should result in the other process dropping its references
    >>>> to the BOs as well, at which point the memory is released.
    >>> OK. How exactly are those BOs mapped to the userspace?
    >> I'm not sure what you're asking. Userspace mostly uses a GEM handle to
    >> refer to a BO. There can also be userspace CPU mappings of the BO's
    >> memory, but userspace doesn't need CPU mappings for all BOs and only
    >> creates them as needed.
    > OK, I guess you have to bear with me some more. This whole stack is a
    > complete uknonwn. I am mostly after finding a boundary where you can
    > charge the allocated memory to the process so that the oom killer can
    > consider it. Is there anything like that? Except for the proposed file
    > handle hack?

    Not that I knew of.

    As I said before we need some kind of callback that a process now starts
    to use a file descriptor, but without anything from that file descriptor
    mapped into the address space.

    Regards,
    Christian.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-01-24 13:11    [W:4.614 / U:0.060 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site