lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch -mm] mm, oom: add global access to memory reserves on livelock
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015, Tetsuo Handa wrote:

> Why can't we think about choosing more OOM victims instead of granting access
> to memory reserves?
>

We have no indication of which thread is holding a mutex that would need
to be killed, so we'd be randomly killing processes waiting for forward
progress. A worst-case scenario would be the thread is OOM_DISABLE and we
kill every process on the system needlessly. This problem obviously
occurs often enough that killing all userspace isnt going to be a viable
solution.

> Also, SysRq might not be usable under OOM because workqueues can get stuck.
> The panic_on_oom_timeout was first proposed using a workqueue but was
> updated to use a timer because there is no guarantee that workqueues work
> as expected under OOM.
>

I don't know anything about a panic_on_oom_timeout, but panicking would
only be a reasonable action if memory reserves were fully depleted. That
could easily be dealt with in the page allocator so there's no timeout
involved.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-08-24 23:41    [W:0.058 / U:0.716 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site