Re: [patch] mm, memcg: do not allow tasks to be attached with zero limit

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

 



On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 10:57:06AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:38:18 -0800
> Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:22:55 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 12:29:51 -0800
> > > Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:14:49 -0800 (PST)
> > > > David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > This patch prevents tasks from being attached to a memcg if there is a
> > > > > hard limit of zero.
> > > > 
> > > > We're talking about the memcg's limit_in_bytes here, yes?
> > > > 
> > > > > Additionally, the hard limit may not be changed to
> > > > > zero if there are tasks attached.
> > > > 
> > > > hm, well...  why?  That would be user error, wouldn't it?  What is
> > > > special about limit_in_bytes=0?  The memcg will also be unviable if
> > > > limit_in_bytes=1, but we permit that.
> > > > 
> > > > IOW, confused.
> > > > 
> > > Ah, yes. limit_in_bytes < some small size can cause the same trouble.
> > > Hmm... should we have configurable min_limit_in_bytes as sysctl or root memcg's
> > > attaribute.. ?
> > 
> > Why do *anything*?  If the operator chose an irrational configuration
> > then things won't work correctly and the operator will then fix the
> > configuration?
> > 
> 
> Because the result of 'error operaton' is SIGKILL to a task, which may be
> owned by very importang customer of hosting service.
> 
> Isn't this severe punishment for error operation ?
> 
> Considering again, I have 2 thoughts.
> 
> - it should be guarded by MiddleWare, it's not kernel job !
> - memcg should be more easy-to-use, friendly to users.
> 
> If the result is just an error as EINVAL or EBUSY, I may not be nervous....

You can still disable the OOM killer.  If you don't, you can always
get killed, so I'm not convinced by this patch or a sysctl, either.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


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