From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f197.google.com (mail-wr0-f197.google.com [209.85.128.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C0E6B0005 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 03:28:22 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr0-f197.google.com with SMTP id q63so7602229wrb.16 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:28:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id r46sor6299749eda.57.2018.01.30.00.28.20 for (Google Transport Security); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:28:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 11:28:17 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Subject: Re: [netfilter-core] kernel panic: Out of memory and no killable processes... (2) Message-ID: <20180130082817.cbax5qj4mxancx4b@node.shutemov.name> References: <001a1144b0caee2e8c0563d9de0a@google.com> <201801290020.w0T0KK8V015938@www262.sakura.ne.jp> <20180129072357.GD5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180129082649.sysf57wlp7i7ltb2@node.shutemov.name> <20180129165722.GF5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180129182811.fze4vrb5zd5cojmr@node.shutemov.name> <20180129223522.GG5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180130075226.GL21609@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180130081127.GH5906@breakpoint.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180130081127.GH5906@breakpoint.cc> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Florian Westphal Cc: Michal Hocko , Tetsuo Handa , davem@davemloft.net, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, aarcange@redhat.com, yang.s@alibaba-inc.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, guro@fb.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote: > > > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > [...] > > > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here. > > > > Not sure what exactly. > > > > > > Would memcg help? > > > > That really depends. I would have to check whether vmalloc path obeys > > __GFP_ACCOUNT (I suspect it does except for page tables allocations but > > that shouldn't be a big deal). But then the other potential problem is > > the life time of the xt_table_info (or other potentially large) data > > structures. Are they bound to any process life time. > > No. Well, IIUC they bound to net namespace life time, so killing all proccesses in the namespace would help to get memory back. :) -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- 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: email@kvack.org