Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932407Ab0BPA0n (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2010 19:26:43 -0500 Received: from fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.37]:38316 "EHLO fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932313Ab0BPA0m (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2010 19:26:42 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 09:23:11 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: David Rientjes Cc: Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Nick Piggin , Andrea Arcangeli , Balbir Singh , Lubos Lunak , KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [patch -mm 4/9 v2] oom: remove compulsory panic_on_oom mode Message-Id: <20100216092311.86bceb0c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20100216090005.f362f869.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (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: 2152 Lines: 47 On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:14:22 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > > If /proc/sys/vm/panic_on_oom is set to 2, the kernel will panic > > > regardless of whether the memory allocation is constrained by either a > > > mempolicy or cpuset. > > > > > > Since mempolicy-constrained out of memory conditions now iterate through > > > the tasklist and select a task to kill, it is possible to panic the > > > machine if all tasks sharing the same mempolicy nodes (including those > > > with default policy, they may allocate anywhere) or cpuset mems have > > > /proc/pid/oom_adj values of OOM_DISABLE. This is functionally equivalent > > > to the compulsory panic_on_oom setting of 2, so the mode is removed. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes > > > > NACK. In an enviroment which depends on cluster-fail-over, this is useful > > even if in such situation. > > > > You don't understand that the behavior has changed ever since > mempolicy-constrained oom conditions are now affected by a compulsory > panic_on_oom mode, please see the patch description. It's absolutely > insane for a single sysctl mode to panic the machine anytime a cpuset or > mempolicy runs out of memory and is more prone to user error from setting > it without fully understanding the ramifications than any use it will ever > do. The kernel already provides a mechanism for doing this, OOM_DISABLE. > if you want your cpuset or mempolicy to risk panicking the machine, set > all tasks that share its mems or nodes, respectively, to OOM_DISABLE. > This is no different from the memory controller being immune to such > panic_on_oom conditions, stop believing that it is the only mechanism used > in the kernel to do memory isolation. > You don't explain why "we _have to_ remove API which is used" 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/