lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8] oom_kill.c: futex: Don't OOM reap the VMA containing the robust_list_head
On Fri 08-04-22 05:40:09, Nico Pache wrote:
>
>
> On 4/8/22 05:36, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 08-04-22 04:52:33, Nico Pache wrote:
> > [...]
> >> In a heavily contended CPU with high memory pressure the delay may also
> >> lead to other processes unnecessarily OOMing.
> >
> > Let me just comment on this part because there is likely a confusion
> > inlved. Delaying the oom_reaper _cannot_ lead to additional OOM killing
> > because the the oom killing is throttled by existence of a preexisting
> > OOM victim. In other words as long as there is an alive victim no
> > further victims are not selected and the oom killer backs off. The
> > oom_repaer will hide the alive oom victim after it is processed.
> > The longer the delay will be the longer an oom victim can block a
> > further progress but it cannot really cause unnecessary OOMing.
> Is it not the case that if we delay an OOM, the amount of available memory stays
> limited and other processes that are allocating memory can become OOM candidates?

No. Have a look at oom_evaluate_task (tsk_is_oom_victim check).

--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-04-08 12:00    [W:0.120 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site