Subject: Re: [v5 2/4] mm, oom: cgroup-aware OOM killer
To: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, kernel-team@fb.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20170814183213.12319-1-guro@fb.com>
 <20170814183213.12319-3-guro@fb.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1708141532300.63207@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20170815121558.GA15892@castle.dhcp.TheFacebook.com>
From: Aleksa Sarai <asarai@suse.de>
Message-ID: <f769d03d-5743-b794-a249-bb52b408ab0e@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 22:20:18 +1000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170815121558.GA15892@castle.dhcp.TheFacebook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 449
Lines: 13

On 08/15/2017 10:15 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Generally, oom_score_adj should have a meaning only on a cgroup level,
> so extending it to the system level doesn't sound as a good idea.

But wasn't the original purpose of oom_score (and oom_score_adj) to work 
on a system level, aka "normal" OOM? Is there some peculiarity about 
memcg OOM that I'm missing?

-- 
Aleksa Sarai
Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
https://www.cyphar.com/