On Tue 2021-06-15 14:42 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > This is all true but it is not really clear why that is really a > problem. Kernel log already contains information about reaped processes > as they are reported to the log. I fully acknowledge that this is rather > spartan but on the other hand from years of experience reading oom > reports I have to say the dump_tasks is the least interesting part of > the report (while being the most verbose one). I understand. I suppose, in a situation whereby dump_tasks() output is only available, for whatever reason, it can provide at least some insight into what tasks were actually considered not OOM eligible and why. > All that being said, I am not really opposing extending the information > although I am a bit worried about leaking too much internal state to the > log. Fair enough. That said, I still feel highlighting such "ineligible" tasks could be useful to the viewer for troubleshooting purposes; we already display OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN. Consider a situation when only a few tasks in a memcg are displayed as possibly OOM eligible but one had MMF_OOM_SKIP applied. In my opinion, perhaps it is better to just exclude such details altogether. That being said, as you know, we only provide this facility when one is interested in it anyway i.e., if oom_dump_tasks is enabled. > What I am asking for here is a justification why this addition is a > general improvement and how it helps uderstanding oom reports further. > So please focus on that part. Sure; albeit, thinking about this more, it does not provide much understanding in simple isolation. Kind regards, -- Aaron Tomlin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
