From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/2] memcg: Facilitate termination of memcg OOM victims.
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 15:38:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190108143830.GV31793@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a49e2b45-10b2-715c-7dcb-2eb7ec5d2cf2@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
On Tue 08-01-19 23:21:23, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
>
> If memcg OOM events in different domains are pending, already OOM-killed
> threads needlessly wait for pending memcg OOM events in different domains.
> An out_of_memory() call is slow because it involves printk(). With slow
> serial consoles, out_of_memory() might take more than a second. Therefore,
> allowing killed processes to quickly call mmput() from exit_mm() from
> do_exit() will help calling __mmput() (which can reclaim more memory than
> the OOM reaper can reclaim) quickly.
Can you post it separately out of this thread please? It is really a
separate topic and I do not want to end with back and forth without
making a further progress.
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 90eb2e2..a7d3ba9 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1389,14 +1389,19 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> };
> bool ret = true;
>
> - mutex_lock(&oom_lock);
> -
> /*
> - * multi-threaded tasks might race with oom_reaper and gain
> - * MMF_OOM_SKIP before reaching out_of_memory which can lead
> - * to out_of_memory failure if the task is the last one in
> - * memcg which would be a false possitive failure reported
> + * Multi-threaded tasks might race with oom_reaper() and gain
> + * MMF_OOM_SKIP before reaching out_of_memory(). But if current
> + * thread was already killed or is ready to terminate, there is
> + * no need to call out_of_memory() nor wait for oom_reaoer() to
> + * set MMF_OOM_SKIP. These three checks minimize possibility of
> + * needlessly calling out_of_memory() and try to call exit_mm()
> + * as soon as possible.
> */
> + if (mutex_lock_killable(&oom_lock))
> + return true;
> + if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> + goto unlock;
> if (tsk_is_oom_victim(current))
> goto unlock;
>
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-08 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-07 14:38 [PATCH 0/2] oom, memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 14:38 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 14:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: marks all killed tasks as oom victims Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 14:38 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 20:58 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-08 8:11 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 14:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM tasks Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 14:38 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-07 20:59 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-08 8:14 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-08 10:39 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-08 11:46 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-08 8:35 ` kbuild test robot
2019-01-08 9:39 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-11 0:23 ` [kbuild-all] " Rong Chen
2019-01-08 14:21 ` [PATCH 3/2] memcg: Facilitate termination of memcg OOM victims Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-08 14:38 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-01-09 11:03 ` [PATCH 0/2] oom, memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM Michal Hocko
2019-01-09 11:34 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-09 12:02 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-10 23:59 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-11 10:25 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-11 11:33 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-11 12:40 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-11 13:34 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-11 14:31 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-11 15:07 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-11 15:37 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-11 16:45 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-12 10:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-13 17:36 ` 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=20190108143830.GV31793@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
/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