Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:2 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:2;
Date:   Mon, 2 Oct 2023 11:36:06 -0400
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        riel@surriel.com, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeelb@google.com,
        muchun.song@linux.dev, tj@kernel.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com,
        shuah@kernel.org, yosryahmed@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        kernel-team@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] hugetlb memcg accounting
Message-ID: <20231002153606.GB5054@cmpxchg.org>
References: <20230926194949.2637078-1-nphamcs@gmail.com>
 <ZRQQMABiVIcXXcrg@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20230927184738.GC365513@cmpxchg.org>
 <20231001232730.GA11194@monkey>
 <20231002144250.GA4414@cmpxchg.org>
 <ZRrajQSHrwNLnXSe@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZRrajQSHrwNLnXSe@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 04:58:21PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Also there is not OOM as hugetlb pages are costly requests and we do not
> invoke the oom killer.

Ah good point.

That seems like a policy choice we could make. However, since hugetlb
users are already set up for and come to expect SIGBUS for physical
failure as well as hugetlb_cgroup limits, we should have memcg follow
established precedent and leave the OOM killer out.

Agree that a sentence in the changelog about this makes sense though.