From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: Always call tlb_finish_mmu().
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:59:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180823115957.GF29735@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1535023848-5554-1-git-send-email-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
On Thu 23-08-18 20:30:48, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Commit 93065ac753e44438 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu
> notifiers") added "continue;" without calling tlb_finish_mmu(). I don't
> know whether tlb_flush_pending imbalance causes problems other than
> extra cost, but at least it looks strange.
tlb_flush_pending has mm scope and it would confuse
mm_tlb_flush_pending. At least ptep_clear_flush could get confused and
flush unnecessarily for prot_none entries AFAICS. Other paths shouldn't
trigger for oom victims. Even ptep_clear_flush is unlikely to happen.
So nothing really earth shattering but I do agree that it looks weird
and should be fixed.
> More worrisome part in that patch is that I don't know whether using
> trylock if blockable == false at entry is really sufficient. For example,
> since __gnttab_unmap_refs_async() from gnttab_unmap_refs_async() from
> gnttab_unmap_refs_sync() from __unmap_grant_pages() from
> unmap_grant_pages() from unmap_if_in_range() from mn_invl_range_start()
> involves schedule_delayed_work() which could be blocked on memory
> allocation under OOM situation, wait_for_completion() from
> gnttab_unmap_refs_sync() might deadlock? I don't know...
Not really sure why this is in the changelog as it is unrelated to the
fix. Anyway let me try to check...
OK, so I've added in_range(map, start, end) check to not go that
direction. But for some reason that check doesn't consider blockable
value. So it looks definitely wrong. I must have screwed up when
rebasing or something. Thanks for catching that up. I will send a fix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index b5b25e4..4f431c1 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -522,6 +522,7 @@ bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
>
> tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, start, end);
> if (mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start_nonblock(mm, start, end)) {
> + tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, start, end);
> ret = false;
> continue;
> }
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-23 12:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-23 11:30 Tetsuo Handa
2018-08-23 11:59 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-08-23 13:48 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-08-23 14:02 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-23 14:11 ` [PATCH v2] mm, oom: Fix missing tlb_finish_mmu() in __oom_reap_task_mm() Tetsuo Handa
2018-08-23 19:23 ` 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=20180823115957.GF29735@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.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