On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 05:24:51PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Johannes Weiner wrote:

quoted

David would have really liked for this patchset to include knobs to
influence how the algorithm picks cgroup victims. The rest of us
agreed that this is beyond the scope of these patches, that the
patches don't need it to be useful, and that there is nothing
preventing anyone from adding configurability later on. David
subsequently nacked the series as he considers it incomplete. Neither
Michal nor I see technical merit in David's nack.

The nack is for three reasons:

 (1) unfair comparison of root mem cgroup usage to bias against that mem 
     cgroup from oom kill in system oom conditions,

 (2) the ability of users to completely evade the oom killer by attaching
     all processes to child cgroups either purposefully or unpurposefully,
     and

 (3) the inability of userspace to effectively control oom victim  
     selection.

My apologies if my summary was too reductionist.

That being said, the arguments you repeat here have come up in
previous threads and been responded to. This doesn't change my
conclusion that your NAK is bogus.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>