Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm, oom_adj: don't loop through tasks in __set_oom_adj when not necessary

[Tetsuo Handa]

On 2020/08/20 23:15, Michal Hocko wrote:
> I would tend to agree that from the userspace POV it is nice to look at
> oom tuning per process but fundamentaly the oom killer operates on the
> address space much more than other resources bound to a process because
> it is usually the address space hogging the largest portion of the
> memory footprint. This is the reason why the oom killer has been
> evaluating tasks based on that aspect rather than other potential memory
> consumers bound to a task. Mostly due to lack of means to evaluate
> those.

We already allow specifying potential memory consumers via oom_task_origin().

If we change from a property of the task/thread-group to a property of mm,
we won't be able to add means to adjust oom score based on other potential
memory consumers bound to a task (e.g. pipes) in the future.