Re: [patch 7/8] mm, memcg: allow processes handling oomnotifications to access reserves

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Michal.

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:32:22PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> You weren't on the CC of the original thread which has started here
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/19/191. And the original request for
> discussion was more about user defined _policies_ for the global
> OOM rather than user space global OOM handler. I feel that there
> are usacases where the current "kill a single task based on some
> calculations" is far from optimal which leads to hacks which try to cope
> with after oom condition somehow gracefully.
> 
> I do agree with you that pulling oom handling sounds too dangerous
> even with all the code that it would need and I feel we should go a
> different path than (ab)using memcg.oom_control interface for that.
> I still think we need to have a way to tell the global OOM killer what
> to do.

Oh yeah, sure, I have no fundamental objections against improving the
in-kernel system OOM handler, including making it cgroup-aware which
seems like a natural extension to me.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/