linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] oom: move oom_adj to signal_struct
Date: Wed,  5 Aug 2009 11:51:31 +0900 (JST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090805114650.5BA1.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090805114004.459a7deb.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop>

> On Wed,  5 Aug 2009 11:29:34 +0900 (JST)
> KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> > 
> > > Hi, Kosaki. 
> > > 
> > > I am so late to invole this thread. 
> > > But let me have a question. 
> > > 
> > > What's advantage of placing oom_adj in singal rather than task ?
> > > I mean task->oom_adj and task->signal->oom_adj ?
> > > 
> > > I am sorry if you already discussed it at last threads. 
> > 
> > Not sorry. that's very good question.
> > 
> > I'm trying to explain the detailed intention of commit 2ff05b2b4eac
> > (move oom_adj to mm_struct).
> > 
> > In 2.6.30, OOM logic callflow is here.
> > 
> > __out_of_memory
> > 	select_bad_process		for each task
> > 		badness			calculate badness of one task
> > 	oom_kill_process		search child
> > 		oom_kill_task		kill target task and mm shared tasks with it
> > 
> > example, process-A have two thread, thread-A and thread-B and it 
> > have very fat memory.
> > And, each thread have following likes oom property.
> > 
> > 	thread-A: oom_adj = OOM_DISABLE, oom_score = 0
> > 	thread-B: oom_adj = 0,           oom_score = very-high
> > 
> > Then, select_bad_process() select thread-B, but oom_kill_task refuse
> > kill the task because thread-A have OOM_DISABLE.
> > __out_of_memory() call select_bad_process() again. but select_bad_process()
> > select the same task. It mean kernel fall in the livelock.
> > 
> > The fact is, select_bad_process() must select killable task. otherwise
> > OOM logic go into livelock.
> > 
> > Is this enough explanation? thanks.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for good explanation. :)
> 
> It resulted from patch of David which moved task_struct->oom_ajd 
> to mm_struct. I understood it. 

No. It's very old problem. David's patch fixed it. 
It mean per-process oom_adj prevent select_bad_process() return
a task in unkillable process.

unfortunatelly, his patch can't treat vfork case ideally. I hope to
fix it.

> It meant oom_adj was not per-process.
> 
> AFAIU, you want to make oom_adj per-process, again. 
> And you selected the place with task->singal as per-process.
> 
> What I have a question is that why do you select task_struct->signal 
> rather than task_struct like old?
> 
> What's benefit of using task_struct->signal ?

prior Davied patch (task->oom_adj) might makes livelock.



--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-05  2:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-04 10:25 [PATCH for 2.6.31 0/4] fix oom_adj regression v2 KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-04 10:25 ` [PATCH 1/4] oom: move oom_adj to signal_struct KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-05  0:45   ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-05  2:29     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-05  2:40       ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-05  2:51         ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2009-08-05  5:55           ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-05  6:03             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-05  6:37               ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-05  6:53                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-05  7:20                   ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-05  6:55                 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-05  6:04             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-05  6:29               ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-05  6:47                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-06  1:34   ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-08-06  5:16     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-04 10:26 ` [PATCH 2/4] oom: make oom_score to per-process value KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-04 10:27 ` [PATCH 3/4] oom: oom_kill doesn't kill vfork parent(or child) KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-04 10:28 ` [PATCH 4/4] oom: fix oom_adjust_write() input sanity check KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-05 23:33   ` Andrew Morton
2009-08-06  5:06     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-05 23:39 ` [PATCH for 2.6.31 0/4] fix oom_adj regression v2 Andrew Morton
2009-08-06  5:13   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-06  8:07     ` Minchan Kim

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=20090805114650.5BA1.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=menage@google.com \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --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