From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: 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: [PATCH 3.1/5] oom: make oom_reaper freezable
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 21:40:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160215204011.GC9223@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201602062333.CCI64980.MFJFFVOLtOOQSH@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Andrew,
this can be either folded into 3/5 patch or go as a standalone one. I
would be inclined to have it standalone for the record (the description
should be pretty clear about the intention) and because the issue is
highly unlikely. OOM during the PM freezer doesn't happen in 99% cases.
On Sat 06-02-16 23:33:24, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > OK, I was thinking about it some more and it seems you are right here.
> > oom_reaper as a kernel thread is not freezable automatically and so it
> > might interfere after all the processes/kernel threads are considered
> > frozen. Then it really might shut down TIF_MEMDIE too early and wake out
> > oom_killer_disable. wait_event_freezable is not sufficient because the
> > oom_reaper might running while the PM freezer is freezing tasks and it
> > will miss it because it doesn't see it.
>
> I'm not using PM freezer, but your answer is opposite to my guess.
> I thought try_to_freeze_tasks(false) is called by freeze_kernel_threads()
> after oom_killer_disable() succeeded, and try_to_freeze_tasks(false) will
> freeze both userspace tasks (including OOM victims which got TIF_MEMDIE
> cleared by the OOM reaper) and kernel threads (including the OOM reaper).
kernel threads which are not freezable are ignored by the freezer.
> Thus, I was guessing that clearing TIF_MEMDIE without reaching do_exit() is
> safe.
Does the following explains it better?
---
>From d7f57b1ac07532657312c91f3bba67cf0332b32f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:09:39 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] oom: make oom_reaper freezable
After "oom: clear TIF_MEMDIE after oom_reaper managed to unmap the
address space" oom_reaper will call exit_oom_victim on the target
task after it is done. This might however race with the PM freezer:
CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
freeze_processes
try_to_freeze_tasks
# Allocation request
out_of_memory
oom_killer_disable
wake_oom_reaper(P1)
__oom_reap_task
exit_oom_victim(P1)
wait_event(oom_victims==0)
[...]
do_exit(P1)
perform IO/interfere with the freezer
which breaks the oom_killer_disable semantic. We no longer have a
guarantee that the oom victim won't interfere with the freezer because
it might be anywhere on the way to do_exit while the freezer thinks the
task has already terminated. It might trigger IO or touch devices which
are frozen already.
In order to close this race, make the oom_reaper thread freezable. This
will work because
a) already running oom_reaper will block freezer to enter the
quiescent state
b) wake_oom_reaper will not wake up the reaper after it has been
frozen
c) the only way to call exit_oom_victim after try_to_freeze_tasks
is from the oom victim's context when we know the further
interference shouldn't be possible
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index ca61e6cfae52..7e9953a64489 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -521,6 +521,8 @@ static void oom_reap_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
{
+ set_freezable();
+
while (true) {
struct task_struct *tsk = NULL;
--
2.7.0
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-15 20:40 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
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 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
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=20160215204011.GC9223@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--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=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--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).