Received: by 10.223.176.46 with SMTP id f43csp926527wra; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 04:20:58 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosBbX7/ZYVlvue31dH7orrFgYRAEChxEMAVNgEYjPzK+cP/Bi9sIMEedM1g1NlKAtWWzVFZ X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:a716:: with SMTP id w22-v6mr1460768plq.299.1516364458351; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 04:20:58 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1516364458; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=d9zUxHNxF5iguXwjhr5YHx0R7zAF9T21uV+3jcdSIyflV15DVvtX5jceCA3wyBjIpF W+xDTsrYezIRZ8agR0BQufPVfwaFMQQHsH5oPal4R/AZ8HWWwxW2Y4m74ToqnI6brtEE weSaUYotqtmJraCB6QfMCCURy1TwpeRTeyjikIjKs/kQmwRLb1Tlc69P59TSIjIJ6DSr y8ZQrXuSLIMR4SrAiOs+mbwZNBijdN+88nlKRFZx91WQy7lUqrs90vjtIU6iBqqKQVRy Bd4BiohGqq3HOJT99LbahZcj5Wx99w1IzsJC7VAc80BYSBYTnwIXb7MOnqj02Y5JRy88 M2aw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=c0o4/bPjnbfatzm+928GM9KjJPd4Jc1ti7DGkUfS8BU=; b=UwCenHwHC7v/g67sMcfHXaQllO8yRjE+Q0PxjFmIIM5T3h6GibBiz18T2fsiXX/wFC Sdn/VlV8CutJC+3CPmet/tUFFBLmd9iWqFOJwdtS8hHF9BBiJXQIxYYlO0ldVbqQh/iV C0h+q5ztzpMtbhQ+pxd0FbYOhnMmsmQs02IqSqTCWo8COFJar7rDRby7+X5MHCizBn5R DfWaM1TUdPTgFjPQNhGikveMvxYwwP2ZcWKjQXf4oToJXbhq1B9UTZlxnNQrlb7oHnS3 /2p8AZaiGy0N1xUK9Twk39eNTiaRd81JPT7aU9XEvfHRJzUT7gC2gV6OXd9x6jidEPRL bvyg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p1si8260800pgc.593.2018.01.19.04.20.44; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 04:20:58 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755597AbeASMUP (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 19 Jan 2018 07:20:15 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:54199 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752153AbeASMUH (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2018 07:20:07 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6999ABD0; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 12:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 13:20:05 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= Cc: Eric Anholt , Andrey Grodzovsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Per file OOM badness Message-ID: <20180119122005.GX6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1516294072-17841-1-git-send-email-andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com> <20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180118171355.GH6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <87k1wfgcmb.fsf@anholt.net> <20180119082046.GL6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <0cfaf256-928c-4cb8-8220-b8992592071b@amd.com> <20180119104058.GU6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180119121351.GW6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180119121351.GW6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 19-01-18 13:13:51, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 19-01-18 12:37:51, Christian K?nig wrote: > [...] > > The per file descriptor badness is/was just the much easier approach to > > solve the issue, because the drivers already knew which client is currently > > using which buffer objects. > > > > I of course agree that file descriptors can be shared between processes and > > are by themselves not killable. But at least for our graphics driven use > > case I don't see much of a problem killing all processes when a file > > descriptor is used by more than one at the same time. > > Ohh, I absolutely see why you have chosen this way for your particular > usecase. I am just arguing that this would rather be more generic to be > merged. If there is absolutely no other way around we can consider it > but right now I do not see that all other options have been considered > properly. Especially when the fd based approach is basically wrong for > almost anybody else. And more importantly. Iterating over _all_ fd which is what is your approach is based on AFAIU is not acceptable for the OOM path. Even though oom_badness is not a hot path we do not really want it to take a lot of time either. Even the current iteration over all processes is quite time consuming. Now you want to add the number of opened files and that might be quite many per process. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs