From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrey Vagin <avagin@openvz.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] vmscan: all_unreclaimable() use zone->all_unreclaimable as a name
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:26:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110411182606.016f9486.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110412100417.43F2.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:04:15 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> > > zone->all_unreclaimable and zone->pages_scanned are neigher atomic
> > > variables nor protected by lock. Therefore zones can become a state
> > > of zone->page_scanned=0 and zone->all_unreclaimable=1. In this case,
> > > current all_unreclaimable() return false even though
> > > zone->all_unreclaimabe=1.
> > >
> > > Is this ignorable minor issue? No. Unfortunatelly, x86 has very
> > > small dma zone and it become zone->all_unreclamble=1 easily. and
> > > if it become all_unreclaimable=1, it never restore all_unreclaimable=0.
> > > Why? if all_unreclaimable=1, vmscan only try DEF_PRIORITY reclaim and
> > > a-few-lru-pages>>DEF_PRIORITY always makes 0. that mean no page scan
> > > at all!
> > >
> > > Eventually, oom-killer never works on such systems. That said, we
> > > can't use zone->pages_scanned for this purpose. This patch restore
> > > all_unreclaimable() use zone->all_unreclaimable as old. and in addition,
> > > to add oom_killer_disabled check to avoid reintroduce the issue of
> > > commit d1908362.
> >
> > The above is a nice analysis of the bug and how it came to be
> > introduced. But we don't actually have a bug description! What was
> > the observeable problem which got fixed?
>
> The above says "Eventually, oom-killer never works". Is this no enough?
> The above says
> 1) current logic have a race
> 2) x86 increase a chance of the race by dma zone
> 3) if race is happen, oom killer don't work
And the system hangs up, so it's a local DoS and I guess we should
backport the fix into -stable. I added this:
: This resulted in the kernel hanging up when executing a loop of the form
:
: 1. fork
: 2. mmap
: 3. touch memory
: 4. read memory
: 5. munmmap
:
: as described in
: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/1348725#1348725
And the problems which the other patches in this series address are
pretty deadly as well. Should we backport everything?
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-12 1:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-11 5:29 [resend][patch 0/4 v3] oom: deadlock avoidance collection KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-11 5:30 ` [PATCH 1/4] vmscan: all_unreclaimable() use zone->all_unreclaimable as a name KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-11 21:53 ` Andrew Morton
2011-04-12 1:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 1:26 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2011-04-12 10:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-13 18:48 ` David Rientjes
2011-04-11 5:31 ` [PATCH 2/4] remove boost_dying_task_prio() KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-11 21:58 ` Andrew Morton
2011-04-12 0:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-13 18:41 ` David Rientjes
2011-04-11 5:31 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: introduce wait_on_page_locked_killable KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-11 5:32 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86,mm: make pagefault killable KOSAKI Motohiro
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=20110411182606.016f9486.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avagin@openvz.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=lclaudio@uudg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@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