On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 07:50:48PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > * MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> [2010-05-28 23:06:23]: > > > > I confess I failed to distinguish memcg OOM and system OOM and used "in > > > case of OOM kill the selected task the faster you can" as the guideline. > > > If the exit code path is short that shouldn't be a problem. > > > > > > Maybe the right way to go would be giving the dying task the biggest > > > priority inside that memcg to be sure that it will be the next process from > > > that memcg to be scheduled. Would that be reasonable? > > > > Hmm. I can't understand your point. > > What do you mean failing distinguish memcg and system OOM? > > > > We already have been distinguish it by mem_cgroup_out_of_memory. > > (but we have to enable CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR). > > So task selected in select_bad_process is one out of memcg's tasks when > > memcg have a memory pressure. > > > > We have a routine to help figure out if the task belongs to the memory > cgroup that cause the OOM. The OOM entry from memory cgroup is > different from a regular one. I meant it. My english is poor. "out of" isn't proper. > > -- > Three Cheers, > Balbir -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>