Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue 01-12-15 15:43:53, Andrew Morton wrote: [...] > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > > index 1ecc0bc..bdbf83b 100644 > > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ > > int sysctl_panic_on_oom; > > int sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task; > > int

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue 01-12-15 15:43:53, Andrew Morton wrote: [...] > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > > index 1ecc0bc..bdbf83b 100644 > > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ > > int sysctl_panic_on_oom; > > int sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task; > > int

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Andrew Morton wrote: > > --- a/include/linux/oom.h > > +++ b/include/linux/oom.h > > @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ static inline bool task_will_free_mem(struct > > task_struct *task) > > > > /* sysctls */ > > extern int sysctl_oom_dump_tasks; > > +extern int sysctl_oom_dump_stack;

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 17:02:30 -0400 Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs can be

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 17:02:30 -0400 Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Andrew Morton wrote: > > --- a/include/linux/oom.h > > +++ b/include/linux/oom.h > > @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ static inline bool task_will_free_mem(struct > > task_struct *task) > > > > /* sysctls */ > > extern int sysctl_oom_dump_tasks; > > +extern int sysctl_oom_dump_stack;

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 05:20:47PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > Yes this is a mess. But I think it is worth cleaning up. > > dump_stack_print_info (arch independent) has a log level parameter. > > show_stack_log_lvl (x86) has a

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 05:20:47PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > Yes this is a mess. But I think it is worth cleaning up. > > dump_stack_print_info (arch independent) has a log level parameter. > > show_stack_log_lvl (x86) has a

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

Hi Michal, On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 05:20:47PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > Yes this is a mess. But I think it is worth cleaning up. > dump_stack_print_info (arch independent) has a log level parameter. > show_stack_log_lvl (x86) has a loglevel parameter which is unused. > > I haven't checked

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue 27-10-15 11:43:42, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:09:21AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > > > Hi Michal, > > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > [...] > > > > Would it make

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

Hi Michal, On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:09:21AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] > > > Would it make more sense to distinguish different parts of the OOM > > >

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Would it make more sense to distinguish different parts of the OOM > > report by loglevel properly? > > pr_err - killed task report > > pr_warning - oom

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Would it make more sense to distinguish different parts of the OOM > > report by loglevel properly? > > pr_err - killed task report > > pr_warning - oom

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

Hi Michal, On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:09:21AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] > > > Would it make more sense to distinguish different parts of the OOM > > >

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Tue 27-10-15 11:43:42, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:09:21AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > > > Hi Michal, > > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > [...] > > > > Would it make

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

Hi Michal, On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 05:20:47PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > Yes this is a mess. But I think it is worth cleaning up. > dump_stack_print_info (arch independent) has a log level parameter. > show_stack_log_lvl (x86) has a loglevel parameter which is unused. > > I haven't checked

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs can be way more

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:01:11PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > I think this makes sense. > > The high volume log output is not just annoying, we have also had > reports from people whose machines locked up as they tried to log > hundreds of containers through a low-bandwidth serial console. >

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

Hi Michal, On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > I can see why you want to reduce the amount of information, I guess you > have tried to reduce the loglevel but this hasn't helped because > dump_stack uses default log level which is too low to be usable, right? > Or are

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri 23-10-15 17:02:30, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs can be way more

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 05:02:30PM -0400, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs can be way more

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 05:02:30PM -0400, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

Hi Michal, On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > I can see why you want to reduce the amount of information, I guess you > have tried to reduce the loglevel but this hasn't helped because > dump_stack uses default log level which is too low to be usable, right? > Or are

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:01:11PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > I think this makes sense. > > The high volume log output is not just annoying, we have also had > reports from people whose machines locked up as they tried to log > hundreds of containers through a low-bandwidth serial console. >

Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

On Fri 23-10-15 17:02:30, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in > some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In > systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each > OOMs can be way more

[PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each OOMs can be way more frequent and being able to reduce the amount of log output

[PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

One of the largest chunks of log messages in a OOM is from dump_stack() and in some cases it isn't even necessary to figure out what's going on. In systems with multiple tenants/containers with limited resources each OOMs can be way more frequent and being able to reduce the amount of log output