From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm v2 04/10] oom: remove special handling for pagefault ooms
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 10:12:59 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100301101259.af730fa0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002261551030.30830@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:53:11 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> It is possible to remove the special pagefault oom handler by simply
> oom locking all system zones and then calling directly into
> out_of_memory().
>
> All populated zones must have ZONE_OOM_LOCKED set, otherwise there is a
> parallel oom killing in progress that will lead to eventual memory
> freeing so it's not necessary to needlessly kill another task. The
> context in which the pagefault is allocating memory is unknown to the oom
> killer, so this is done on a system-wide level.
>
> If a task has already been oom killed and hasn't fully exited yet, this
> will be a no-op since select_bad_process() recognizes tasks across the
> system with TIF_MEMDIE set.
>
> The special handling to determine whether a parallel memcg is currently
> oom is removed since we can detect future memory freeing with TIF_MEMDIE.
> The memcg has already reached its memory limit, so it will still need to
> kill a task regardless of the pagefault oom.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
NACK. please leave memcg's oom as it is. We're now rewriting.
This is not core of your patch set. please skip.
Thanks,
-Kame
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 6 ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 35 +---------------
> mm/oom_kill.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 3 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -124,7 +124,6 @@ static inline bool mem_cgroup_disabled(void)
> return false;
> }
>
> -extern bool mem_cgroup_oom_called(struct task_struct *task);
> void mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped(struct page *page, int val);
> unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim(struct zone *zone, int order,
> gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
> @@ -258,11 +257,6 @@ static inline bool mem_cgroup_disabled(void)
> return true;
> }
>
> -static inline bool mem_cgroup_oom_called(struct task_struct *task)
> -{
> - return false;
> -}
> -
> static inline int
> mem_cgroup_inactive_anon_is_low(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> {
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -217,7 +217,6 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
> * Should the accounting and control be hierarchical, per subtree?
> */
> bool use_hierarchy;
> - unsigned long last_oom_jiffies;
> atomic_t refcnt;
>
> unsigned int swappiness;
> @@ -1205,34 +1204,6 @@ static int mem_cgroup_hierarchical_reclaim(struct mem_cgroup *root_mem,
> return total;
> }
>
> -bool mem_cgroup_oom_called(struct task_struct *task)
> -{
> - bool ret = false;
> - struct mem_cgroup *mem;
> - struct mm_struct *mm;
> -
> - rcu_read_lock();
> - mm = task->mm;
> - if (!mm)
> - mm = &init_mm;
> - mem = mem_cgroup_from_task(rcu_dereference(mm->owner));
> - if (mem && time_before(jiffies, mem->last_oom_jiffies + HZ/10))
> - ret = true;
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> - return ret;
> -}
> -
> -static int record_last_oom_cb(struct mem_cgroup *mem, void *data)
> -{
> - mem->last_oom_jiffies = jiffies;
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> -static void record_last_oom(struct mem_cgroup *mem)
> -{
> - mem_cgroup_walk_tree(mem, NULL, record_last_oom_cb);
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Currently used to update mapped file statistics, but the routine can be
> * generalized to update other statistics as well.
> @@ -1484,10 +1455,8 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struct mm_struct *mm,
> continue;
>
> if (!nr_retries--) {
> - if (oom) {
> + if (oom)
> mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(mem_over_limit, gfp_mask);
> - record_last_oom(mem_over_limit);
> - }
> goto nomem;
> }
> }
> @@ -2284,8 +2253,6 @@ void mem_cgroup_end_migration(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
>
> /*
> * A call to try to shrink memory usage on charge failure at shmem's swapin.
> - * Calling hierarchical_reclaim is not enough because we should update
> - * last_oom_jiffies to prevent pagefault_out_of_memory from invoking global OOM.
> * Moreover considering hierarchy, we should reclaim from the mem_over_limit,
> * not from the memcg which this page would be charged to.
> * try_charge_swapin does all of these works properly.
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -580,6 +580,44 @@ void clear_zonelist_oom(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> }
>
> /*
> + * Try to acquire the oom killer lock for all system zones. Returns zero if a
> + * parallel oom killing is taking place, otherwise locks all zones and returns
> + * non-zero.
> + */
> +static int try_set_system_oom(void)
> +{
> + struct zone *zone;
> + int ret = 1;
> +
> + spin_lock(&zone_scan_lock);
> + for_each_populated_zone(zone)
> + if (zone_is_oom_locked(zone)) {
> + ret = 0;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + for_each_populated_zone(zone)
> + zone_set_flag(zone, ZONE_OOM_LOCKED);
> +out:
> + spin_unlock(&zone_scan_lock);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Clears ZONE_OOM_LOCKED for all system zones so that failed allocation
> + * attempts or page faults may now recall the oom killer, if necessary.
> + */
> +static void clear_system_oom(void)
> +{
> + struct zone *zone;
> +
> + spin_lock(&zone_scan_lock);
> + for_each_populated_zone(zone)
> + zone_clear_flag(zone, ZONE_OOM_LOCKED);
> + spin_unlock(&zone_scan_lock);
> +}
> +
> +
> +/*
> * Must be called with tasklist_lock held for read.
> */
> static void __out_of_memory(gfp_t gfp_mask, int order,
> @@ -614,46 +652,9 @@ retry:
> goto retry;
> }
>
> -/*
> - * pagefault handler calls into here because it is out of memory but
> - * doesn't know exactly how or why.
> - */
> -void pagefault_out_of_memory(void)
> -{
> - unsigned long freed = 0;
> -
> - blocking_notifier_call_chain(&oom_notify_list, 0, &freed);
> - if (freed > 0)
> - /* Got some memory back in the last second. */
> - return;
> -
> - /*
> - * If this is from memcg, oom-killer is already invoked.
> - * and not worth to go system-wide-oom.
> - */
> - if (mem_cgroup_oom_called(current))
> - goto rest_and_return;
> -
> - if (sysctl_panic_on_oom)
> - panic("out of memory from page fault. panic_on_oom is selected.\n");
> -
> - read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> - /* unknown gfp_mask and order */
> - __out_of_memory(0, 0, CONSTRAINT_NONE, NULL);
> - read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> -
> - /*
> - * Give "p" a good chance of killing itself before we
> - * retry to allocate memory.
> - */
> -rest_and_return:
> - if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE))
> - schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
> -}
> -
> /**
> * out_of_memory - kill the "best" process when we run out of memory
> - * @zonelist: zonelist pointer
> + * @zonelist: zonelist pointer passed to page allocator
> * @gfp_mask: memory allocation flags
> * @order: amount of memory being requested as a power of 2
> * @nodemask: nodemask passed to page allocator
> @@ -667,7 +668,7 @@ void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> int order, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> {
> unsigned long freed = 0;
> - enum oom_constraint constraint;
> + enum oom_constraint constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE;
>
> blocking_notifier_call_chain(&oom_notify_list, 0, &freed);
> if (freed > 0)
> @@ -683,7 +684,8 @@ void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> * Check if there were limitations on the allocation (only relevant for
> * NUMA) that may require different handling.
> */
> - constraint = constrained_alloc(zonelist, gfp_mask, nodemask);
> + if (zonelist)
> + constraint = constrained_alloc(zonelist, gfp_mask, nodemask);
> read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> if (unlikely(sysctl_panic_on_oom)) {
> /*
> @@ -693,6 +695,7 @@ void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> */
> if (constraint == CONSTRAINT_NONE) {
> dump_header(NULL, gfp_mask, order, NULL);
> + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> panic("Out of memory: panic_on_oom is enabled\n");
> }
> }
> @@ -706,3 +709,17 @@ void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE))
> schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * The pagefault handler calls here because it is out of memory, so kill a
> + * memory-hogging task. If a populated zone has ZONE_OOM_LOCKED set, a parallel
> + * oom killing is already in progress so do nothing. If a task is found with
> + * TIF_MEMDIE set, it has been killed so do nothing and allow it to exit.
> + */
> +void pagefault_out_of_memory(void)
> +{
> + if (!try_set_system_oom())
> + return;
> + out_of_memory(NULL, 0, 0, NULL);
> + clear_system_oom();
> +}
>
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-01 1:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-26 23:52 [patch -mm v2 00/10] oom killer rewrite David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 01/10] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset David Rientjes
2010-03-02 4:54 ` Balbir Singh
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 02/10] oom: sacrifice child with highest badness score for parent David Rientjes
2010-03-02 4:54 ` Balbir Singh
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 03/10] oom: select task from tasklist for mempolicy ooms David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 04/10] oom: remove special handling for pagefault ooms David Rientjes
2010-03-01 1:12 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2010-03-01 10:13 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-01 23:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 23:55 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-03 0:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 0:44 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-01 5:23 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-01 10:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-01 23:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 0:01 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-03 0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 0:38 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-03 0:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 0:53 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-03 0:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 23:27 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-04 3:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-04 6:50 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-04 7:00 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-04 9:50 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-05 0:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 2:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 23:59 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 05/10] oom: badness heuristic rewrite David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 06/10] oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 07/10] oom: replace sysctls with quick mode David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 08/10] oom: avoid oom killer for lowmem allocations David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 09/10] oom: remove unnecessary code and cleanup David Rientjes
2010-02-26 23:53 ` [patch -mm v2 10/10] oom: default to killing current for pagefault ooms David Rientjes
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=20100301101259.af730fa0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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