lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] epoll: account epitem and eppoll_entry to kmemcg
>
> I am not objecting to the patch I would just like to understand the
> runaway case. ep_insert seems to limit the maximum number of watches to
> max_user_watches which should be ~4% of lowmem if I am following the
> code properly. pwq_cache should be bound by the number of watches as
> well, or am I misunderstanding the code?
>

You are absolutely right that there is a per-user limit (~4% of total
memory if no highmem) on these caches. I think it is too generous
particularly in the scenario where jobs of multiple users are running
on the system and the administrator is reducing cost by overcomitting
the memory. This is unaccounted kernel memory and will not be
considered by the oom-killer. I think by accounting it to kmemcg, for
systems with kmem accounting enabled, we can provide better isolation
between jobs of different users.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-04 21:33    [W:0.175 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site