Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Use timeout based back off.

2018-10-25 Thread Michal Hocko
On Wed 24-10-18 15:54:54, Andrew Morton wrote: [...] > There has been a lot of heat and noise and confusion and handwaving in > all of this. What we're crying out for is simple testcases which > everyone can run. Find a problem, write the testcase, distribute that. > Develop a solution for that t

Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Use timeout based back off.

2018-10-24 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 14:11:10 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes wrote: > > Michal has been refusing timeout based approach, but I don't think this > > is something we have to be frayed around the edge about possibility of > > overlooking races/bugs just because Michal does not want to use timeout. > > I

Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Use timeout based back off.

2018-10-22 Thread Michal Hocko
On Mon 22-10-18 14:11:10, David Rientjes wrote: [...] > I've proposed patches that have been running for months in a production > environment that make the oom killer useful without serially killing many > processes unnecessarily. At this point, it is *much* easier to just fork > the oom killer

Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Use timeout based back off.

2018-10-22 Thread David Rientjes
On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > This patch changes the OOM killer to wait for either > > (A) __mmput() of the OOM victim's mm completes > > or > > (B) the OOM reaper gives up waiting for (A) because memory pages > used by the OOM victim's mm did not decrease for one second

[PATCH] mm,oom: Use timeout based back off.

2018-10-20 Thread Tetsuo Handa
This patch changes the OOM killer to wait for either (A) __mmput() of the OOM victim's mm completes or (B) the OOM reaper gives up waiting for (A) because memory pages used by the OOM victim's mm did not decrease for one second in order to mitigate at least three problems (1) an OO