* Re: cgroup oom regression introduced by 6a5ce1b94e1e5979f8db579f77d6e08a5f44c13b
2010-09-18 15:21 ` Minchan Kim
@ 2010-09-20 8:01 ` CAI Qian
2010-09-20 13:13 ` Rik van Riel
2010-09-21 0:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: CAI Qian @ 2010-09-20 8:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Minchan Kim
Cc: linux-mm, KOSAKI Motohiro, M. Vefa Bicakci, Johannes Weiner,
Rik van Riel, stable, akpm
----- "Minchan Kim" <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 08:52:34AM -0400, caiqian@redhat.com wrote:
> > This test hung the kernel without triggering oom.
> > # mount -t cgroup -o memory none /cgroup/memory/
> > # mkdir /cgroup/memory/A
> > # echo $$ >/cgroup/memory/A/tasks
> > # echo 4096M >/cgroup/memory/A/memory.limit_in_bytes
> > # echo 4096M >/cgroup/memory/A/memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes
> > # use malloc to allocate more than 4G memory.
> >
> > Sometimes, this had been thrown out of console,
> > localhost.localdomain login: INFO: task sm1:5065 blocked for more
> than 120 seconds.
> > "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this
> message.
> > sm1 D 00000000fffca130 0 5065 5051 0x00000080
> > ffff880c5f419c38 0000000000000086 ffff880c5f419bc8
> ffffffff81034ca8
> > ffff880100000000 0000000000015440 ffff880c608ab4e0
> 0000000000015440
> > ffff880c608aba40 ffff880c5f419fd8 ffff880c608aba48
> ffff880c5f419fd8
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff81034ca8>] ? pvclock_clocksource_read+0x58/0xd0
> > [<ffffffff810f2c60>] ? sync_page+0x0/0x50
> > [<ffffffff81492553>] io_schedule+0x73/0xc0
> > [<ffffffff810f2c9d>] sync_page+0x3d/0x50
> > [<ffffffff81492cba>] __wait_on_bit_lock+0x5a/0xc0
> > [<ffffffff810f2c37>] __lock_page+0x67/0x70
> > [<ffffffff8107cf90>] ? wake_bit_function+0x0/0x50
> > [<ffffffff810f2a6e>] ? find_get_page+0x1e/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff810f4a5c>] filemap_fault+0x33c/0x450
> > [<ffffffff81110524>] __do_fault+0x54/0x550
> > [<ffffffff8113f30a>] ? __mem_cgroup_commit_charge+0x5a/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff811132a2>] handle_mm_fault+0x1c2/0xc70
> > [<ffffffff8149809c>] do_page_fault+0x11c/0x320
> > [<ffffffff81494cd5>] page_fault+0x25/0x30
> >
> > Reverted the following commit from mmotm tree made the problem go
> away.
> > commit 6a5ce1b94e1e5979f8db579f77d6e08a5f44c13b
> > Author: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> > Date: Thu Sep 16 01:17:26 2010 +0200
> >
> > M. Vefa Bicakci reported 2.6.35 kernel hang up when hibernation
> on his
> > 32bit 3GB mem machine.
> > (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16771). Also he
> bisected
> > the regression to
> >
> > commit bb21c7ce18eff8e6e7877ca1d06c6db719376e3c
> > Author: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > Date: Fri Jun 4 14:15:05 2010 -0700
> >
> > vmscan: fix do_try_to_free_pages() return value when
> priority==0 reclaim failure
> >
> > At first impression, this seemed very strange because the above
> commit
> > only chenged function return value and
> hibernate_preallocate_memory()
> > ignore return value of shrink_all_memory(). But it's related.
> >
> > Now, page allocation from hibernation code may enter infinite
> loop if the
> > system has highmem. The reasons are that vmscan don't care
> enough OOM
> > case when oom_killer_disabled.
> >
> > The problem sequence is following as.
> >
> > 1. hibernation
> > 2. oom_disable
> > 3. alloc_pages
> > 4. do_try_to_free_pages
> > if (scanning_global_lru(sc) && !all_unreclaimable)
> > return 1;
> >
> > If kswapd is not freozen, it would set zone->all_unreclaimable
> to 1 and
> > then shrink_zones maybe return true(ie, all_unreclaimable is
> true). So at
> > last, alloc_pages could go to _nopage_. If it is, it should
> have no
> > problem.
> >
> > This patch adds all_unreclaimable check to protect in direct
> reclaim path,
> > too. It can care of hibernation OOM case and help bailout
> > all_unreclaimable case slightly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> > Reported-by: M. Vefa Bicakci <bicave@superonline.com>
> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> > Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index 225a759..f56a8c3 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -1804,12 +1804,11 @@ static void shrink_zone(int priority, struct
> zone *zone,
> > * If a zone is deemed to be full of pinned pages then just give it
> a light
> > * scan then give up on it.
> > */
> > -static bool shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > +static void shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > struct zoneref *z;
> > struct zone *zone;
> > - bool all_unreclaimable = true;
> >
> > for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> > gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> > @@ -1827,8 +1826,36 @@ static bool shrink_zones(int priority, struct
> zonelist *zonelist,
> > }
> >
> > shrink_zone(priority, zone, sc);
> > - all_unreclaimable = false;
> > }
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool zone_reclaimable(struct zone *zone)
> > +{
> > + return zone->pages_scanned < zone_reclaimable_pages(zone) * 6;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool all_unreclaimable(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > + struct scan_control *sc)
> > +{
> > + struct zoneref *z;
> > + struct zone *zone;
> > + bool all_unreclaimable = true;
> > +
> > + if (!scanning_global_lru(sc))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> > + gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> > + if (!populated_zone(zone))
> > + continue;
> > + if (!cpuset_zone_allowed_hardwall(zone, GFP_KERNEL))
> > + continue;
> > + if (zone_reclaimable(zone)) {
> > + all_unreclaimable = false;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > return all_unreclaimable;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1852,7 +1879,6 @@ static unsigned long
> do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > int priority;
> > - bool all_unreclaimable;
> > unsigned long total_scanned = 0;
> > struct reclaim_state *reclaim_state = current->reclaim_state;
> > struct zoneref *z;
> > @@ -1869,7 +1895,7 @@ static unsigned long
> do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > sc->nr_scanned = 0;
> > if (!priority)
> > disable_swap_token();
> > - all_unreclaimable = shrink_zones(priority, zonelist, sc);
> > + shrink_zones(priority, zonelist, sc);
> > /*
> > * Don't shrink slabs when reclaiming memory from
> > * over limit cgroups
> > @@ -1931,7 +1957,7 @@ out:
> > return sc->nr_reclaimed;
> >
> > /* top priority shrink_zones still had more to do? don't OOM, then
> */
> > - if (scanning_global_lru(sc) && !all_unreclaimable)
> > + if (!all_unreclaimable(zonelist, sc))
> > return 1;
> >
> > return 0;
> > @@ -2197,8 +2223,7 @@ loop_again:
> > total_scanned += sc.nr_scanned;
> > if (zone->all_unreclaimable)
> > continue;
> > - if (nr_slab == 0 &&
> > - zone->pages_scanned >= (zone_reclaimable_pages(zone) * 6))
> > + if (nr_slab == 0 && !zone_reclaimable(zone))
> > zone->all_unreclaimable = 1;
> > /*
> > * If we've done a decent amount of scanning and
>
> Thanks for the reporting.
> Could you test below patch?
The problem went away after applied this patch.
>
> From 666a10163dcc2366a3cce64140487e5956f7f659 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> 2001
> From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 23:16:14 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix all_unreclaimable in memcg.
>
> vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch
> has a problem. It changed old behavior of memcg.
>
> When memory pressure in memcg is high, do_try_to_free_pages returns
> 0. It causes mem_cgroup_out_of_memory so that any process in mem
> group
> would be killed.
> But vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch
> changed
> the old behavior. It returns 1 unconditionally regardless of
> considering
> global reclaim or memcg relcaim. It causes hang without triggering OOM
>
> in case of memcg direct reclaim.
>
> This patch fixes it.
>
> It's reported by caiqian@redhat.com.
> (Thanks. Totally, it's my fault.)
>
> Reported-by: caiqian@redhat.com
> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 5 +----
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index ecae0ef..0119d0d 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1919,9 +1919,6 @@ static bool all_unreclaimable(struct zonelist
> *zonelist,
> struct zone *zone;
> bool all_unreclaimable = true;
>
> - if (!scanning_global_lru(sc))
> - return false;
> -
> for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> if (!populated_zone(zone))
> @@ -2035,7 +2032,7 @@ out:
> return sc->nr_reclaimed;
>
> /* top priority shrink_zones still had more to do? don't OOM, then
> */
> - if (!all_unreclaimable(zonelist, sc))
> + if (scanning_global_lru(sc) && !all_unreclaimable(zonelist, sc))
> return 1;
>
> return 0;
> --
> 1.7.0.5
>
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Minchan Kim
>
> --
> 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>
--
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>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: cgroup oom regression introduced by 6a5ce1b94e1e5979f8db579f77d6e08a5f44c13b
2010-09-18 15:21 ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-20 8:01 ` CAI Qian
@ 2010-09-20 13:13 ` Rik van Riel
2010-09-21 0:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rik van Riel @ 2010-09-20 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Minchan Kim
Cc: caiqian, linux-mm, KOSAKI Motohiro, M. Vefa Bicakci,
Johannes Weiner, stable, akpm
On 09/18/2010 11:21 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> When memory pressure in memcg is high, do_try_to_free_pages returns
> 0. It causes mem_cgroup_out_of_memory so that any process in mem group
> would be killed.
> But vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch changed
> the old behavior. It returns 1 unconditionally regardless of considering
> global reclaim or memcg relcaim. It causes hang without triggering OOM
> in case of memcg direct reclaim.
>
> This patch fixes it.
>
> It's reported by caiqian@redhat.com.
> (Thanks. Totally, it's my fault.)
>
> Reported-by: caiqian@redhat.com
> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner<hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Rik van Riel<riel@redhat.com>
> Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Balbir Singh<balbir@in.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim<minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
--
All rights reversed
--
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>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: cgroup oom regression introduced by 6a5ce1b94e1e5979f8db579f77d6e08a5f44c13b
2010-09-18 15:21 ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-20 8:01 ` CAI Qian
2010-09-20 13:13 ` Rik van Riel
@ 2010-09-21 0:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki @ 2010-09-21 0:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Minchan Kim
Cc: caiqian, linux-mm, KOSAKI Motohiro, M. Vefa Bicakci,
Johannes Weiner, Rik van Riel, stable, akpm
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 00:21:20 +0900
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 08:52:34AM -0400, caiqian@redhat.com wrote:
> > This test hung the kernel without triggering oom.
> > # mount -t cgroup -o memory none /cgroup/memory/
> > # mkdir /cgroup/memory/A
> > # echo $$ >/cgroup/memory/A/tasks
> > # echo 4096M >/cgroup/memory/A/memory.limit_in_bytes
> > # echo 4096M >/cgroup/memory/A/memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes
> > # use malloc to allocate more than 4G memory.
> >
> > Sometimes, this had been thrown out of console,
> > localhost.localdomain login: INFO: task sm1:5065 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > sm1 D 00000000fffca130 0 5065 5051 0x00000080
> > ffff880c5f419c38 0000000000000086 ffff880c5f419bc8 ffffffff81034ca8
> > ffff880100000000 0000000000015440 ffff880c608ab4e0 0000000000015440
> > ffff880c608aba40 ffff880c5f419fd8 ffff880c608aba48 ffff880c5f419fd8
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff81034ca8>] ? pvclock_clocksource_read+0x58/0xd0
> > [<ffffffff810f2c60>] ? sync_page+0x0/0x50
> > [<ffffffff81492553>] io_schedule+0x73/0xc0
> > [<ffffffff810f2c9d>] sync_page+0x3d/0x50
> > [<ffffffff81492cba>] __wait_on_bit_lock+0x5a/0xc0
> > [<ffffffff810f2c37>] __lock_page+0x67/0x70
> > [<ffffffff8107cf90>] ? wake_bit_function+0x0/0x50
> > [<ffffffff810f2a6e>] ? find_get_page+0x1e/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff810f4a5c>] filemap_fault+0x33c/0x450
> > [<ffffffff81110524>] __do_fault+0x54/0x550
> > [<ffffffff8113f30a>] ? __mem_cgroup_commit_charge+0x5a/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff811132a2>] handle_mm_fault+0x1c2/0xc70
> > [<ffffffff8149809c>] do_page_fault+0x11c/0x320
> > [<ffffffff81494cd5>] page_fault+0x25/0x30
> >
> > Reverted the following commit from mmotm tree made the problem go away.
> > commit 6a5ce1b94e1e5979f8db579f77d6e08a5f44c13b
> > Author: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> > Date: Thu Sep 16 01:17:26 2010 +0200
> >
> > M. Vefa Bicakci reported 2.6.35 kernel hang up when hibernation on his
> > 32bit 3GB mem machine.
> > (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16771). Also he bisected
> > the regression to
> >
> > commit bb21c7ce18eff8e6e7877ca1d06c6db719376e3c
> > Author: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > Date: Fri Jun 4 14:15:05 2010 -0700
> >
> > vmscan: fix do_try_to_free_pages() return value when priority==0 reclaim failure
> >
> > At first impression, this seemed very strange because the above commit
> > only chenged function return value and hibernate_preallocate_memory()
> > ignore return value of shrink_all_memory(). But it's related.
> >
> > Now, page allocation from hibernation code may enter infinite loop if the
> > system has highmem. The reasons are that vmscan don't care enough OOM
> > case when oom_killer_disabled.
> >
> > The problem sequence is following as.
> >
> > 1. hibernation
> > 2. oom_disable
> > 3. alloc_pages
> > 4. do_try_to_free_pages
> > if (scanning_global_lru(sc) && !all_unreclaimable)
> > return 1;
> >
> > If kswapd is not freozen, it would set zone->all_unreclaimable to 1 and
> > then shrink_zones maybe return true(ie, all_unreclaimable is true). So at
> > last, alloc_pages could go to _nopage_. If it is, it should have no
> > problem.
> >
> > This patch adds all_unreclaimable check to protect in direct reclaim path,
> > too. It can care of hibernation OOM case and help bailout
> > all_unreclaimable case slightly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> > Reported-by: M. Vefa Bicakci <bicave@superonline.com>
> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> > Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index 225a759..f56a8c3 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -1804,12 +1804,11 @@ static void shrink_zone(int priority, struct zone *zone,
> > * If a zone is deemed to be full of pinned pages then just give it a light
> > * scan then give up on it.
> > */
> > -static bool shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > +static void shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > struct zoneref *z;
> > struct zone *zone;
> > - bool all_unreclaimable = true;
> >
> > for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> > gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> > @@ -1827,8 +1826,36 @@ static bool shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > }
> >
> > shrink_zone(priority, zone, sc);
> > - all_unreclaimable = false;
> > }
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool zone_reclaimable(struct zone *zone)
> > +{
> > + return zone->pages_scanned < zone_reclaimable_pages(zone) * 6;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool all_unreclaimable(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > + struct scan_control *sc)
> > +{
> > + struct zoneref *z;
> > + struct zone *zone;
> > + bool all_unreclaimable = true;
> > +
> > + if (!scanning_global_lru(sc))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> > + gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> > + if (!populated_zone(zone))
> > + continue;
> > + if (!cpuset_zone_allowed_hardwall(zone, GFP_KERNEL))
> > + continue;
> > + if (zone_reclaimable(zone)) {
> > + all_unreclaimable = false;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > return all_unreclaimable;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1852,7 +1879,6 @@ static unsigned long do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > int priority;
> > - bool all_unreclaimable;
> > unsigned long total_scanned = 0;
> > struct reclaim_state *reclaim_state = current->reclaim_state;
> > struct zoneref *z;
> > @@ -1869,7 +1895,7 @@ static unsigned long do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > sc->nr_scanned = 0;
> > if (!priority)
> > disable_swap_token();
> > - all_unreclaimable = shrink_zones(priority, zonelist, sc);
> > + shrink_zones(priority, zonelist, sc);
> > /*
> > * Don't shrink slabs when reclaiming memory from
> > * over limit cgroups
> > @@ -1931,7 +1957,7 @@ out:
> > return sc->nr_reclaimed;
> >
> > /* top priority shrink_zones still had more to do? don't OOM, then */
> > - if (scanning_global_lru(sc) && !all_unreclaimable)
> > + if (!all_unreclaimable(zonelist, sc))
> > return 1;
> >
> > return 0;
> > @@ -2197,8 +2223,7 @@ loop_again:
> > total_scanned += sc.nr_scanned;
> > if (zone->all_unreclaimable)
> > continue;
> > - if (nr_slab == 0 &&
> > - zone->pages_scanned >= (zone_reclaimable_pages(zone) * 6))
> > + if (nr_slab == 0 && !zone_reclaimable(zone))
> > zone->all_unreclaimable = 1;
> > /*
> > * If we've done a decent amount of scanning and
>
> Thanks for the reporting.
> Could you test below patch?
>
> From 666a10163dcc2366a3cce64140487e5956f7f659 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 23:16:14 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix all_unreclaimable in memcg.
>
> vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch
> has a problem. It changed old behavior of memcg.
>
> When memory pressure in memcg is high, do_try_to_free_pages returns
> 0. It causes mem_cgroup_out_of_memory so that any process in mem group
> would be killed.
> But vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch changed
> the old behavior. It returns 1 unconditionally regardless of considering
> global reclaim or memcg relcaim. It causes hang without triggering OOM
> in case of memcg direct reclaim.
>
> This patch fixes it.
>
> It's reported by caiqian@redhat.com.
> (Thanks. Totally, it's my fault.)
>
> Reported-by: caiqian@redhat.com
> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 5 +----
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index ecae0ef..0119d0d 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1919,9 +1919,6 @@ static bool all_unreclaimable(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> struct zone *zone;
> bool all_unreclaimable = true;
>
> - if (!scanning_global_lru(sc))
> - return false;
> -
> for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> if (!populated_zone(zone))
> @@ -2035,7 +2032,7 @@ out:
> return sc->nr_reclaimed;
>
> /* top priority shrink_zones still had more to do? don't OOM, then */
> - if (!all_unreclaimable(zonelist, sc))
> + if (scanning_global_lru(sc) && !all_unreclaimable(zonelist, sc))
> return 1;
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Thank you.
--
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>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread