From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@kernel.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, rientjes@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
oleg@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, hughd@google.com,
andrea@kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] oom: clear TIF_MEMDIE after oom_reaper managed to unmap the address space
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 20:23:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201602062023.ECG12960.QVStLJOHFOFMOF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160206083014.GA25220@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Michal Hocko wrote:
> I am not really sure I understand what you are trying to tell here to be honest
> but no I am not going to add any timers at this stage.
> Dropping TIF_MEMDIE will help to unlock OOM killer as soon as we know
> the current victim is no longer interesting for the OOM killer to allow
> further victims selection. If we add MMF_OOM_REAP_DONE after reaping and
> oom_scan_process_thread is taught to ignore those you will get all cases
> of shared memory handles properly AFAICS. Such a patch should be really
> trivial enhancement on top of the current code.
What I'm trying to tell is that we should prepare for corner cases where
dropping TIF_MEMDIE (or reaping the victim's memory) is not taken place.
What happens if TIF_MEMDIE was set at
if (current->mm &&
(fatal_signal_pending(current) || task_will_free_mem(current))) {
mark_oom_victim(current);
return true;
}
in out_of_memory() because current thread received SIGKILL while doing
a GFP_KERNEL allocation of
Do a GFP_KERNEL allocation.
Bail out if GFP_KERNEL allocation failed.
Hold a lock.
Do a GFP_NOFS allocation.
Release a lock.
sequence? If current thread is blocked at waiting for that lock held by
somebody else doing memory allocation, nothing will unlock the OOM killer
(because the OOM reaper is not woken up and a timer for unlocking the OOM
killer does not exist).
What happens if TIF_MEMDIE was set at
task_lock(p);
if (p->mm && task_will_free_mem(p)) {
mark_oom_victim(p);
task_unlock(p);
put_task_struct(p);
return;
}
task_unlock(p);
in oom_kill_process() when p is waiting for a lock held by somebody else
doing memory allocation? Since the OOM reaper will not be woken up,
nothing will unlock the OOM killer.
If TIF_MEMDIE was set at
do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_FORCED, victim, true);
mark_oom_victim(victim);
pr_err("Killed process %d (%s) total-vm:%lukB, anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB\n",
in oom_kill_process() but the OOM reaper was not woken up because of
p->signal->oom_score_adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN case, nothing will unlock
the OOM killer.
By always waking the OOM reaper up, we can delegate the duty of unlocking
the OOM killer (by clearing TIF_MEMDIE or some other means) to the OOM
reaper because the OOM reaper is tracking all TIF_MEMDIE tasks.
Of course, it is possible that we handle such corner cases by adding
a timer for unlocking the OOM killer (regardless of availability of the
OOM reaper). But if we do "whether a mm is reapable or not" check at the
OOM reaper side by waking the OOM reaper up whenever TIF_MEMDIE is set
on some task, we can increase likeliness of dropping TIF_MEMDIE (after
reaping the victim's memory) being taken place and reduce frequency of
killing more OOM victims by using a timer for unlocking the OOM killer.
> I would like to target the next merge window rather than have this out
> of tree for another release cycle which means that we should really
> focus on the current functionality and make sure we haven't missed
> anything. As there is no fundamental disagreement to the approach all
> the rest are just technicalities.
Of course, we can target the OOM reaper for the next merge window. I'm
suggesting you that my changes would help handling corner cases (bugs)
you are not paying attention to.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-06 11:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-03 13:13 [PATCH 0/5] oom reaper v5 Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 13:13 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 23:48 ` David Rientjes
2016-02-04 6:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 13:22 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-15 20:50 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 13:13 ` [PATCH 2/5] oom reaper: handle mlocked pages Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 23:57 ` David Rientjes
2016-02-23 1:36 ` David Rientjes
2016-02-23 13:21 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-29 3:19 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-02-29 13:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-08 13:40 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-08 20:07 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-03-09 8:26 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 13:13 ` [PATCH 3/5] oom: clear TIF_MEMDIE after oom_reaper managed to unmap the address space Michal Hocko
2016-02-04 14:22 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-04 14:43 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-04 15:08 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-04 16:31 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-05 11:14 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-06 8:30 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 11:23 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2016-02-15 20:47 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 6:45 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 14:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-15 20:40 ` [PATCH 3.1/5] oom: make oom_reaper freezable Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 13:13 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm, oom_reaper: report success/failure Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 23:10 ` David Rientjes
2016-02-04 6:46 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-04 22:31 ` David Rientjes
2016-02-05 9:26 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 6:34 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 13:14 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm, oom_reaper: implement OOM victims queuing Michal Hocko
2016-02-04 10:49 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-04 14:53 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 5:54 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-06 8:37 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-06 15:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-15 20:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-16 11:11 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-16 15:53 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 9:48 ` [PATCH 6/5] oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 10:41 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-17 11:33 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 18:34 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-20 2:32 ` [PATCH 6/5] oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-22 9:41 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201602062023.ECG12960.QVStLJOHFOFMOF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrea@kernel.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).