[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] Per file OOM badness
On 2018-01-24 12:01 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 24-01-18 11:27:15, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> On 2018-01-24 10:28 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> So how exactly then helps to kill one of those processes? The memory
>>> stays pinned behind or do I still misunderstand?
>> Fundamentally, the memory is only released once all references to the
>> BOs are dropped. That's true no matter how the memory is accounted for
>> between the processes referencing the BO.
>> In practice, this should be fine:
>> 1. The amount of memory used for shared BOs is normally small compared
>> to the amount of memory used for non-shared BOs (and other things). So
>> regardless of how shared BOs are accounted for, the OOM killer should
>> first target the process which is responsible for more memory overall.
> OK. So this is essentially the same as with the normal shared memory
> which is a part of the RSS in general.


>> 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.

Earthling Michel Dänzer |
Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-24 12:23    [W:0.128 / U:15.360 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site