Received: by 2002:a25:8b12:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i18csp2526037ybl; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:19:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy0KPosdBAbA6ekQyHmPFSMQptP8cdC/QVLx/zl2kVBdb3CS8Xsp6+kg9WV+Uuo5J+PT4vP X-Received: by 2002:a63:5a0a:: with SMTP id o10mr9205130pgb.282.1567095556208; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:19:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1567095556; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=X4AMLAIOvMYX+HFDUE4s6Ic9INqCqqS3fUoDu1V4Ay+rwelK4StB1Z6XtLdSalu9oQ JhDkmAPDf/Uc0qCZZs565/keG/+tdRz89vvJ9ojQ/h0veJYV6EfyZ72Tz6GMChkLmj9Y 7ts2NlDyM1vUI/mjexcH6jDtLl/yaL1TdbgnnE3n+LN0EZMFoQWABYQtpA9YmNhdqOzG 8kVOxkhBfgkUHGl+YYQw6Gk/n5ZQ6N3rGQWyK3QYKp2kkoNCfg8vVQGka/Tjc5e1ipgY Mq+mVqqskV4sWwS9ncDwbOv0AoZsQP3f2BVwHEtlDf8nJwSXLrjkZp2Sh/YqRdfWo3Em FdbQ== 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-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=FDDWmd4qp4i4eqLKJNZbaxL1EKAaGGgVR8ITc+eA16c=; b=G/7+hDDJnx7agqlF99e8omsqBAX9Dp9k7qO9ox9+gfWa4c+VFo81RpGkpxeH8i3ItK Rj6g49g4HtZbD3bEun9D8sj5dO+edIm6USo1Xu5hEFHxga5Kuu1gh3PMmVN6A3NTbsnI HtHB9psj5AJwl6cClqsgDxYzmW5DbQ35oSJejnvJ+IMqTlAGR7zlOhaV38kIcvQJmtr1 czC+yLrPzZV6j6QFbiuUWa1KXTjK+BhxDdcX+WmcVAzl1iy80Fb8W5RO7poiwk0Gf+T9 w5g10YCa3Nfppdraw3fH7fA6Mnb1dX8ENXS9WdRJwtUjWgOmBJJwxtLh0+vJmqO20Kve wfRA== 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; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h10si2293570pls.319.2019.08.29.09.18.57; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:19:16 -0700 (PDT) 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; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727495AbfH2QSC (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:18:02 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:48798 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726728AbfH2QSC (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:18:02 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22AACAFF9; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 16:18:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 18:17:59 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Edward Chron Cc: Tetsuo Handa , Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , Johannes Weiner , David Rientjes , Shakeel Butt , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ivan Delalande Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] OOM Debug print selection and additional information Message-ID: <20190829161759.GK28313@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190826193638.6638-1-echron@arista.com> <20190827071523.GR7538@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190828065955.GB7386@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190829071105.GQ28313@dhcp22.suse.cz> <297cf049-d92e-f13a-1386-403553d86401@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20190829115608.GD28313@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 29-08-19 08:03:19, Edward Chron wrote: > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 4:56 AM Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Or simply provide a hook with the oom_control to be called to report > > without replacing the whole oom killer behavior. That is not necessary. > > For very simple addition, to add a line of output this works. Why would a hook be limited to small stuff? > It would still be nice to address the fact the existing OOM Report prints > all of the user processes or none. It would be nice to add some control > for that. That's what we did. TBH, I am not really convinced partial taks list is desirable nor easy to configure. What is the criterion? oom_score (with potentially unstable metric)? Rss? Something else? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs