Received: by 10.223.176.46 with SMTP id f43csp592238wra; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:02:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225cjJ+cjaVxn+/y9f9d4xC0jiYtNpbiPwgqhETn0TEW6v9FsUpunBWYCQ/vjUVEijjm+Tzk X-Received: by 10.98.220.195 with SMTP id c64mr12525296pfl.47.1516791756459; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:02:36 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1516791756; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=rR6sKhIt/JGVsvW9rusbcGnzplcWvQ/raTfJofx6kzaOMpAs7N6nqUjshJD/6jfJyh pomYJKDEy9aov4lAq9kvZGozoyW5ICGiO5NdXSTXRq5r6Vt1dA8tMlnT25MtMcn0scBQ 4+E9aYCQJp2tzPQ5tDomgg2/elAPRmet4uT+WsNAeqyPVYAcdJcWjHItE5Xz7oH/QwV1 3h75QEErzpYWuK03uRZQXvGN0RGIR+q+yBfW5YeIS+XCxb9xqRx+kiOQskXKECXguQID dL1uvFoaVO+L3OfNPnuDebjLl21NChRMeaxgxr76XFaE8NBembNpZ0GnhyKIVMOqdOB+ 92NQ== 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=xeeMsDgfv7ivPPBWhjj1kknm6vYLSkN01FNpJHs/Fyc=; b=MEnZgM8KT7RYBUzHKVxh93ghBGFHlUPFb7JaLQTZE+dCK32shaFAeG7wMPIigDElu1 gZ+3QW3RVrd3GQKXqIusNf5LuDRxcBn45E4aAlcutqg2kFyCRRuoWTDYx/JkXyh2BpoI iauv7M3bdo0LF90HoAl701JQafUK+J7AmB0yCA5sop4lv9Bfm1TwMcfyWfIlPRbghb0G XlBPvHZWjTs0uXyNMrTjv6VJWJkWRBcG75Y8FdiaIjQp+OnrEnIebreQ9rNz9ADglcGr 2CUy7Jf0ETyqNqBTF2eG+SRyUy+UnVzR7HOSYuSEpVkCx7hjZwVYOuoc/sAi5YZE5SID tm2A== 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 t21si2763562pfh.167.2018.01.24.03.02.22; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:02:36 -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 S933206AbeAXLBv (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:01:51 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:49393 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933161AbeAXLBp (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:01:45 -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 C0ADBABD0; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:01:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 12:01:41 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Michel =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=E4nzer?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Christian.Koenig@amd.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: [RFC] Per file OOM badness Message-ID: <20180124110141.GA28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1516294072-17841-1-git-send-email-andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com> <20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180123152659.GA21817@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <20180123153631.GR1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180124092847.GI1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <583f328e-ff46-c6a4-8548-064259995766@daenzer.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <583f328e-ff46-c6a4-8548-064259995766@daenzer.net> 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 Wed 24-01-18 11:27:15, Michel D?nzer wrote: > On 2018-01-24 10:28 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > So how exactly then helps to kill one of those processes? The memory > > stays pinned behind or do I still misunderstand? > > Fundamentally, the memory is only released once all references to the > BOs are dropped. That's true no matter how the memory is accounted for > between the processes referencing the BO. > > > In practice, this should be fine: > > 1. The amount of memory used for shared BOs is normally small compared > to the amount of memory used for non-shared BOs (and other things). So > regardless of how shared BOs are accounted for, the OOM killer should > first target the process which is responsible for more memory overall. OK. So this is essentially the same as with the normal shared memory which is a part of the RSS in general. > 2. If the OOM killer kills a process which is sharing BOs with another > process, this should result in the other process dropping its references > to the BOs as well, at which point the memory is released. OK. How exactly are those BOs mapped to the userspace? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs