From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757856AbcBDWba (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 4 Feb 2016 17:31:30 -0500
Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.220.42]:35029 "EHLO
	mail-pa0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1757329AbcBDWb2 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 4 Feb 2016 17:31:28 -0500
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:31:26 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Andrea Argangeli <andrea@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm, oom_reaper: report success/failure
In-Reply-To: <20160204064636.GD8581@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1602041428120.29117@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
References: <1454505240-23446-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1454505240-23446-5-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1602031505210.10331@chino.kir.corp.google.com> <20160204064636.GD8581@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Michal Hocko wrote:

> > I think it would be helpful to show anon-rss after reaping, however, so we 
> > can compare to the previous anon-rss that was reported.  And, I agree that 
> > leaving behind a message in the kernel log that reaping has been 
> > successful is worthwhile.  So this line should just show what anon-rss is 
> > after reaping and make it clear that this is not the memory reaped.
> 
> Does
> "oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s) current memory anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB "
> 
> sound any better?

oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB

would probably be better until additional support is added to do other 
kinds of reaping other than just primarily heap.  This should help to 
quantify the exact amount of memory that could be reaped (or otherwise 
unmapped) iff oom_reaper has to get involved rather than fluctations that 
have nothing to do with it.