Re: [patch] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> And accessing the emergency reserves means we are definitely no longer
> A-OK, this is not comparable to the first direct reclaim invocation.
> 
> We exhausted our options and we got really lucky.  It should not be
> considered the baseline and a user listening for "OOM conditions"
> should be informed about this.

Definitely concur - there are loading tuning cases where you want to
drive the box to the point it starts whining and then scale back a touch.

It's an API change in effect, and while I can believe there are good
arguments for both any API change ought to be a new API for listening
only to serious OOM cases.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux