Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753317AbZKDAYx (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 19:24:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751254AbZKDAYx (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 19:24:53 -0500 Received: from fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.37]:36713 "EHLO fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751105AbZKDAYw (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 19:24:52 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:22:13 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: David Rientjes Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, KOSAKI Motohiro , Andrea Arcangeli , Andrew Morton , minchan.kim@gmail.com, vedran.furac@gmail.com, Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm][PATCH 3/6] oom-killer: count lowmem rss Message-Id: <20091104092213.02f27075.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20091102162244.9425e49b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091102162617.9d07e05f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1884 Lines: 56 On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:24:01 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > > Count lowmem rss per mm_struct. Lowmem here means... > > > > for NUMA, pages in a zone < policy_zone. > > for HIGHMEM x86, pages in NORMAL zone. > > for others, all pages are lowmem. > > > > Now, lower_zone_protection[] works very well for protecting lowmem but > > possiblity of lowmem-oom is not 0 even if under good protection in the kernel. > > (As fact, it's can be configured by sysctl. When we keep it high, there > > will be tons of not-for-use memory but system will be protected against > > rare event of lowmem-oom.) > > Right, lowmem isn't addressed currently by the oom killer. Adding this > constraint will probably make the heuristics much harder to write and > understand. It's not always clear that we want to kill a task using > lowmem just because another task needs some, for instance. The same can be said against all oom-kill ;) > Do you think we'll need a way to defer killing any task is no task is > heuristically found to be hogging lowmem? Yes, I think so. But my position is a bit different. In typical x86-32 server case, which has 4-8G memory, most of memory usage is highmem. So, if we have no knowledge of lowmem, multiple innocent processes will be killed in every 30 secs of oom-kill. My final goal is migrating lowmem pages to highmem as kswapd-migraion or oom-migration. Total rewrite for this will be required in future. Thanks, -Kame Thanks, -Kame Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/