From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: rientjes@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: prevent additional oom kills before memory is freed
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:12:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170616141255.GN30580@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201706162122.ACE95321.tOFLOOVFFHMSJQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
On Fri 16-06-17 21:22:20, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > OK, could you play with the patch/idea suggested in
> > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170615122031.GL1486@dhcp22.suse.cz?
>
> I think we don't need to worry about mmap_sem dependency inside __mmput().
> Since the OOM killer checks for !MMF_OOM_SKIP mm rather than TIF_MEMDIE thread,
> we can keep the OOM killer disabled until we set MMF_OOM_SKIP to the victim's mm.
> That is, elevating mm_users throughout the reaping procedure does not cause
> premature victim selection, even after TIF_MEMDIE is cleared from the victim's
> thread. Then, we don't need to use down_write()/up_write() for non OOM victim's mm
> (nearly 100% of exit_mmap() calls), and can force partial reaping of OOM victim's mm
> (nearly 0% of exit_mmap() calls) before __mmput() starts doing exit_aio() etc.
> Patch is shown below. Only compile tested.
Yes, that would be another approach.
> include/linux/sched/coredump.h | 1 +
> mm/oom_kill.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> index 98ae0d0..6b6237b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ static inline int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct *mm)
> * on NFS restore
> */
> //#define MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED 18 /* see prctl_set_mm_exe_file() */
> +#define MMF_OOM_REAPING 18 /* mm is supposed to be reaped */
A new flag is not really needed. We can increase it for _each_ reapable
oom victim.
> @@ -658,6 +643,13 @@ static void mark_oom_victim(struct task_struct *tsk)
> if (!cmpxchg(&tsk->signal->oom_mm, NULL, mm))
> mmgrab(tsk->signal->oom_mm);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> + if (!test_bit(MMF_OOM_REAPING, &mm->flags)) {
> + set_bit(MMF_OOM_REAPING, &mm->flags);
> + mmget(mm);
> + }
> +#endif
This would really need a big fat warning explaining why we do not need
mmget_not_zero. We rely on exit_mm doing both mmput and tsk->mm = NULL
under the task_lock and mark_oom_victim is called under this lock as
well and task_will_free_mem resp. find_lock_task_mm makes sure we do not
even consider tasks wihout mm.
I agree that a solution which is fully contained inside the oom proper
would be preferable to touching __mmput path.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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:[~2017-06-16 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-14 23:43 David Rientjes
2017-06-15 10:39 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 10:53 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-15 11:01 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 11:32 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-15 12:03 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 12:13 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 13:01 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-15 13:22 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 21:43 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-15 21:37 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-15 12:20 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 21:26 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-15 21:41 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 22:03 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-15 22:12 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-15 22:42 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-16 8:06 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-16 0:54 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-16 4:00 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-16 8:39 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-16 10:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-16 11:02 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-16 14:26 ` Re: [patch] mm, oom: prevent additional oom kills before memoryis freed Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-16 14:42 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-17 13:30 ` Re: [patch] mm, oom: prevent additional oom kills before memory is freed Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-23 12:38 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-16 12:22 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-16 14:12 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-06-17 5:17 ` [PATCH] mm,oom_kill: Close race window of needlessly selecting new victims Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-20 22:12 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-21 2:17 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-21 20:31 ` David Rientjes
2017-06-22 0:53 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-23 12:45 ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-21 13:18 ` Michal Hocko
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=20170616141255.GN30580@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--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