Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:24:27 +0200 | From | Michal Hocko <> | Subject | Re: [RFC -v2] panic_on_oom_timeout |
| |
On Wed 17-06-15 14:51:27, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > The important thing is to decide what is the reasonable way forward. We > have two two implementations of panic based timeout. So we should decide
And the most obvious question, of course. - Should we add a panic timeout at all?
> - Should be the timeout bound to panic_on_oom? > - Should we care about constrained OOM contexts? > - If yes should they use the same timeout? > - If yes should each memcg be able to define its own timeout? ^ no
> My thinking is that it should be bound to panic_on_oom=1 only until we > hear from somebody actually asking for a constrained oom and even then > do not allow for too large configuration space (e.g. no per-memcg > timeout) or have separate mempolicy vs. memcg timeouts. > > Let's start simple and make things more complicated later!
-- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
| |