From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:54:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131118155450.GB3556@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311141447160.21413@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 02:57:51PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > > > Somebody called out_of_memory() after they
> > > > failed reclaim, the machine is OOM.
> > >
> > > While momentarily oom, the oom notifiers in powerpc and s390 have the
> > > ability to free memory without requiring a kill.
> >
> > So either
> >
> > 1) they should be part of the regular reclaim process, or
> >
> > 2) their invocation is severe enough to not be part of reclaim, at
> > which point we should probably tell userspace about the OOM
> >
>
> (1) is already true, we can avoid oom by freeing memory for subsystems
> using register_oom_notifier(), so we're not actually oom. It's a late
> callback into the kernel to free memory in a sense of reclaim. It was
> added directly into out_of_memory() purely for simplicity; it could be
> moved to the page allocator if we move all of the oom_notify_list helpers
> there as well.
If they can easily free it without any repercussions, they should
really be part of regular reclaim. Maybe convert them to shrinkers.
And then you can use OOM notifiers to be notified about OOM.
> The same is true of silently setting TIF_MEMDIE for current so that it has
> access to memory reserves and may exit when it has a pending SIGKILL or is
> already exiting.
>
> In both cases, we're not actually oom because either (a) the kernel can
> still free memory and avoid actually killing a process, or (b) current
> simply needs access to memory reserves so it may die.
>
> We don't want to invoke the userspace oom handler when we first enter
> direct reclaim, for example, for the same reason.
Reclaim is an option the kernel always has, the current task exiting
is a coincidence.
And accessing the emergency reserves means we are definitely no longer
A-OK, this is not comparable to the first direct reclaim invocation.
We exhausted our options and we got really lucky. It should not be
considered the baseline and a user listening for "OOM conditions"
should be informed about this.
--
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:[~2013-11-18 15:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-31 1:39 David Rientjes
2013-10-31 5:49 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-13 22:19 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-13 23:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-14 0:56 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-14 3:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-14 22:57 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-14 23:26 ` [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves David Rientjes
2013-11-14 23:26 ` [patch 2/2] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom David Rientjes
2013-11-18 18:52 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-19 1:25 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-19 12:41 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-18 12:52 ` [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves Michal Hocko
2013-11-18 12:55 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-19 1:19 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-18 15:41 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-18 16:51 ` Michal Hocko
2013-11-19 1:22 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-22 16:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-27 0:53 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-27 16:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-27 21:51 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-27 23:19 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-28 0:22 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-28 2:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-11-28 2:52 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-28 3:16 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-02 20:02 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-02 21:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-03 12:04 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-03 20:17 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-03 21:00 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-03 21:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-03 23:50 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-04 3:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-04 11:13 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-05 0:23 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-09 12:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-09 21:46 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-09 22:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-12-09 23:05 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-10 0:34 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-10 10:38 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-11 1:03 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-11 9:55 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-11 22:40 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-12 10:31 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-12 10:50 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-12 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-12 12:37 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-13 23:55 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-17 16:23 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-17 20:50 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-18 20:04 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-19 6:09 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-19 14:41 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-08 0:25 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-08 10:33 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-09 14:30 ` [PATCH] memcg: Do not hang on OOM when killed by userspace OOM " Michal Hocko
2014-01-09 21:40 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-10 21:33 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-15 14:26 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-15 21:19 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-16 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-21 6:13 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-21 13:21 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-09 21:34 ` [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs " David Rientjes
2014-01-09 22:47 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-10 0:01 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 0:12 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-10 0:23 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 0:35 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 22:14 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-12 22:10 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-15 14:34 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-15 21:23 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-16 9:32 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-21 5:58 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-21 6:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartmann
2014-01-21 6:08 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 8:30 ` Michal Hocko
2014-01-10 21:38 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-10 22:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-01-12 22:14 ` David Rientjes
2013-11-18 15:54 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2013-11-18 23:15 ` [patch] mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom One Thousand Gnomes
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=20131118155450.GB3556@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--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