lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [v6 3/4] mm, oom: introduce oom_priority for memory cgroups
On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, Roman Gushchin wrote:

> > > Do you have an example, which can't be effectively handled by an approach
> > > I'm suggesting?
> >
> > No, I do not have any which would be _explicitly_ requested but I do
> > envision new requirements will emerge. The most probable one would be
> > kill the youngest container because that would imply the least amount of
> > work wasted.
>
> I agree, this a nice feature. It can be implemented in userspace
> by setting oom_priority.
>

Yes, the "kill the newest memory cgroup as a tiebreak" is not strictly
required in the kernel and no cgroup should depend on this implementation
detail to avoid being killed if it shares the same memory.oom_priority as
another cgroup. As you mention, it can be effectively implemented by
userspace itself.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-28 22:54    [W:0.096 / U:0.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site