* [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() @ 2019-06-13 13:55 Yafang Shao 2019-06-13 18:56 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Yafang Shao @ 2019-06-13 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: akpm, mhocko; +Cc: linux-mm, Yafang Shao In dump_oom_summary() oc->constraint is used to show oom_constraint_text, but it hasn't been set before. So the value of it is always the default value 0. We should set it in constrained_alloc(). Bellow is the output when memcg oom occurs, before this patch: [ 133.078102] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_NONE,nodemask=(null), cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=7997,uid=0 after this patch: [ 952.977946] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,nodemask=(null), cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=13681,uid=0 Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> --- mm/oom_kill.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c index 5a58778..075e5cf 100644 --- a/mm/oom_kill.c +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c @@ -261,29 +261,37 @@ static enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct oom_control *oc) struct zone *zone; struct zoneref *z; enum zone_type high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(oc->gfp_mask); + enum oom_constraint constraint; bool cpuset_limited = false; int nid; if (is_memcg_oom(oc)) { oc->totalpages = mem_cgroup_get_max(oc->memcg) ?: 1; - return CONSTRAINT_MEMCG; + constraint = CONSTRAINT_MEMCG; + goto out; } /* Default to all available memory */ oc->totalpages = totalram_pages() + total_swap_pages; - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA)) - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA)) { + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; + goto out; + } - if (!oc->zonelist) - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; + if (!oc->zonelist) { + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; + goto out; + } /* * Reach here only when __GFP_NOFAIL is used. So, we should avoid * to kill current.We have to random task kill in this case. * Hopefully, CONSTRAINT_THISNODE...but no way to handle it, now. */ - if (oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE) - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; + if (oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE) { + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; + goto out; + } /* * This is not a __GFP_THISNODE allocation, so a truncated nodemask in @@ -295,7 +303,8 @@ static enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct oom_control *oc) oc->totalpages = total_swap_pages; for_each_node_mask(nid, *oc->nodemask) oc->totalpages += node_spanned_pages(nid); - return CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY; + constraint = CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY; + goto out; } /* Check this allocation failure is caused by cpuset's wall function */ @@ -308,9 +317,15 @@ static enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct oom_control *oc) oc->totalpages = total_swap_pages; for_each_node_mask(nid, cpuset_current_mems_allowed) oc->totalpages += node_spanned_pages(nid); - return CONSTRAINT_CPUSET; + constraint = CONSTRAINT_CPUSET; + goto out; } - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; + + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; + +out: + oc->constraint = constraint; + return constraint; } static int oom_evaluate_task(struct task_struct *task, void *arg) -- 1.8.3.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() 2019-06-13 13:55 [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() Yafang Shao @ 2019-06-13 18:56 ` Michal Hocko 2019-06-14 5:58 ` Yafang Shao 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2019-06-13 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yafang Shao; +Cc: akpm, linux-mm, yuzhoujian On Thu 13-06-19 21:55:50, Yafang Shao wrote: > In dump_oom_summary() oc->constraint is used to show > oom_constraint_text, but it hasn't been set before. > So the value of it is always the default value 0. > We should set it in constrained_alloc(). Thanks for catching that. > Bellow is the output when memcg oom occurs, > > before this patch: > [ 133.078102] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_NONE,nodemask=(null), > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=7997,uid=0 > > after this patch: > [ 952.977946] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,nodemask=(null), > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=13681,uid=0 > unless I am missing something Fixes: ef8444ea01d7 ("mm, oom: reorganize the oom report in dump_header") The patch looks correct but I think it is more complicated than it needs to be. Can we do the following instead? diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c index 5a58778c91d4..f719b64741d6 100644 --- a/mm/oom_kill.c +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c @@ -987,8 +987,7 @@ static void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, const char *message) /* * Determines whether the kernel must panic because of the panic_on_oom sysctl. */ -static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, - enum oom_constraint constraint) +static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc) { if (likely(!sysctl_panic_on_oom)) return; @@ -998,7 +997,7 @@ static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, * does not panic for cpuset, mempolicy, or memcg allocation * failures. */ - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) return; } /* Do not panic for oom kills triggered by sysrq */ @@ -1035,7 +1034,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(unregister_oom_notifier); bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) { unsigned long freed = 0; - enum oom_constraint constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; if (oom_killer_disabled) return false; @@ -1071,10 +1069,10 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) * Check if there were limitations on the allocation (only relevant for * NUMA and memcg) that may require different handling. */ - constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) + oc->constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) oc->nodemask = NULL; - check_panic_on_oom(oc, constraint); + check_panic_on_oom(oc); if (!is_memcg_oom(oc) && sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task && current->mm && !oom_unkillable_task(current, NULL, oc->nodemask) && I guess the current confusion comes from the fact that we have constraint both in the oom_control and a local variable so I would rather remove that. What do you think? > Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> > --- > mm/oom_kill.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > index 5a58778..075e5cf 100644 > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > @@ -261,29 +261,37 @@ static enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct oom_control *oc) > struct zone *zone; > struct zoneref *z; > enum zone_type high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(oc->gfp_mask); > + enum oom_constraint constraint; > bool cpuset_limited = false; > int nid; > > if (is_memcg_oom(oc)) { > oc->totalpages = mem_cgroup_get_max(oc->memcg) ?: 1; > - return CONSTRAINT_MEMCG; > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_MEMCG; > + goto out; > } > > /* Default to all available memory */ > oc->totalpages = totalram_pages() + total_swap_pages; > > - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA)) > - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA)) { > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + goto out; > + } > > - if (!oc->zonelist) > - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + if (!oc->zonelist) { > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + goto out; > + } > /* > * Reach here only when __GFP_NOFAIL is used. So, we should avoid > * to kill current.We have to random task kill in this case. > * Hopefully, CONSTRAINT_THISNODE...but no way to handle it, now. > */ > - if (oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE) > - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + if (oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE) { > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + goto out; > + } > > /* > * This is not a __GFP_THISNODE allocation, so a truncated nodemask in > @@ -295,7 +303,8 @@ static enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct oom_control *oc) > oc->totalpages = total_swap_pages; > for_each_node_mask(nid, *oc->nodemask) > oc->totalpages += node_spanned_pages(nid); > - return CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY; > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY; > + goto out; > } > > /* Check this allocation failure is caused by cpuset's wall function */ > @@ -308,9 +317,15 @@ static enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct oom_control *oc) > oc->totalpages = total_swap_pages; > for_each_node_mask(nid, cpuset_current_mems_allowed) > oc->totalpages += node_spanned_pages(nid); > - return CONSTRAINT_CPUSET; > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_CPUSET; > + goto out; > } > - return CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + > + constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > + > +out: > + oc->constraint = constraint; > + return constraint; > } > > static int oom_evaluate_task(struct task_struct *task, void *arg) > -- > 1.8.3.1 > -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() 2019-06-13 18:56 ` Michal Hocko @ 2019-06-14 5:58 ` Yafang Shao 2019-06-14 8:21 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Yafang Shao @ 2019-06-14 5:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko; +Cc: Andrew Morton, Linux MM, yuzhoujian On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:56 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: > > On Thu 13-06-19 21:55:50, Yafang Shao wrote: > > In dump_oom_summary() oc->constraint is used to show > > oom_constraint_text, but it hasn't been set before. > > So the value of it is always the default value 0. > > We should set it in constrained_alloc(). > > Thanks for catching that. > > > Bellow is the output when memcg oom occurs, > > > > before this patch: > > [ 133.078102] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_NONE,nodemask=(null), > > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=7997,uid=0 > > > > after this patch: > > [ 952.977946] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,nodemask=(null), > > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=13681,uid=0 > > > > unless I am missing something > Fixes: ef8444ea01d7 ("mm, oom: reorganize the oom report in dump_header") > > The patch looks correct but I think it is more complicated than it needs > to be. Can we do the following instead? > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > index 5a58778c91d4..f719b64741d6 100644 > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > @@ -987,8 +987,7 @@ static void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, const char *message) > /* > * Determines whether the kernel must panic because of the panic_on_oom sysctl. > */ > -static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, > - enum oom_constraint constraint) > +static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc) > { > if (likely(!sysctl_panic_on_oom)) > return; > @@ -998,7 +997,7 @@ static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, > * does not panic for cpuset, mempolicy, or memcg allocation > * failures. > */ > - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) > + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) > return; > } > /* Do not panic for oom kills triggered by sysrq */ > @@ -1035,7 +1034,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(unregister_oom_notifier); > bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) > { > unsigned long freed = 0; > - enum oom_constraint constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > > if (oom_killer_disabled) > return false; > @@ -1071,10 +1069,10 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) > * Check if there were limitations on the allocation (only relevant for > * NUMA and memcg) that may require different handling. > */ > - constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); > - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) > + oc->constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); > + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) > oc->nodemask = NULL; > - check_panic_on_oom(oc, constraint); > + check_panic_on_oom(oc); > > if (!is_memcg_oom(oc) && sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task && > current->mm && !oom_unkillable_task(current, NULL, oc->nodemask) && > > I guess the current confusion comes from the fact that we have > constraint both in the oom_control and a local variable so I would > rather remove that. What do you think? Remove the local variable is fine by me. Thanks Yafang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() 2019-06-14 5:58 ` Yafang Shao @ 2019-06-14 8:21 ` Michal Hocko 2019-06-14 9:46 ` Yafang Shao 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2019-06-14 8:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yafang Shao; +Cc: yuzhoujian, Linux MM, Andrew Morton On Fri 14-06-19 13:58:11, Yafang Shao wrote: > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:56 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu 13-06-19 21:55:50, Yafang Shao wrote: > > > In dump_oom_summary() oc->constraint is used to show > > > oom_constraint_text, but it hasn't been set before. > > > So the value of it is always the default value 0. > > > We should set it in constrained_alloc(). > > > > Thanks for catching that. > > > > > Bellow is the output when memcg oom occurs, > > > > > > before this patch: > > > [ 133.078102] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_NONE,nodemask=(null), > > > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=7997,uid=0 > > > > > > after this patch: > > > [ 952.977946] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,nodemask=(null), > > > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=13681,uid=0 > > > > > > > unless I am missing something > > Fixes: ef8444ea01d7 ("mm, oom: reorganize the oom report in dump_header") > > > > The patch looks correct but I think it is more complicated than it needs > > to be. Can we do the following instead? > > > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > > index 5a58778c91d4..f719b64741d6 100644 > > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > > @@ -987,8 +987,7 @@ static void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, const char *message) > > /* > > * Determines whether the kernel must panic because of the panic_on_oom sysctl. > > */ > > -static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, > > - enum oom_constraint constraint) > > +static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc) > > { > > if (likely(!sysctl_panic_on_oom)) > > return; > > @@ -998,7 +997,7 @@ static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, > > * does not panic for cpuset, mempolicy, or memcg allocation > > * failures. > > */ > > - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) > > + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) > > return; > > } > > /* Do not panic for oom kills triggered by sysrq */ > > @@ -1035,7 +1034,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(unregister_oom_notifier); > > bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) > > { > > unsigned long freed = 0; > > - enum oom_constraint constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > > > > if (oom_killer_disabled) > > return false; > > @@ -1071,10 +1069,10 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) > > * Check if there were limitations on the allocation (only relevant for > > * NUMA and memcg) that may require different handling. > > */ > > - constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); > > - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) > > + oc->constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); > > + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) > > oc->nodemask = NULL; > > - check_panic_on_oom(oc, constraint); > > + check_panic_on_oom(oc); > > > > if (!is_memcg_oom(oc) && sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task && > > current->mm && !oom_unkillable_task(current, NULL, oc->nodemask) && > > > > I guess the current confusion comes from the fact that we have > > constraint both in the oom_control and a local variable so I would > > rather remove that. What do you think? > > Remove the local variable is fine by me. Could you repost the patch with the changelog mentioning Fixes and the simpler diff please? You can then add Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Thanks! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() 2019-06-14 8:21 ` Michal Hocko @ 2019-06-14 9:46 ` Yafang Shao 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Yafang Shao @ 2019-06-14 9:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko; +Cc: yuzhoujian, Linux MM, Andrew Morton On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:22 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: > > On Fri 14-06-19 13:58:11, Yafang Shao wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:56 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu 13-06-19 21:55:50, Yafang Shao wrote: > > > > In dump_oom_summary() oc->constraint is used to show > > > > oom_constraint_text, but it hasn't been set before. > > > > So the value of it is always the default value 0. > > > > We should set it in constrained_alloc(). > > > > > > Thanks for catching that. > > > > > > > Bellow is the output when memcg oom occurs, > > > > > > > > before this patch: > > > > [ 133.078102] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_NONE,nodemask=(null), > > > > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=7997,uid=0 > > > > > > > > after this patch: > > > > [ 952.977946] oom-kill:constraint=CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,nodemask=(null), > > > > cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0,oom_memcg=/foo,task_memcg=/foo,task=bash,pid=13681,uid=0 > > > > > > > > > > unless I am missing something > > > Fixes: ef8444ea01d7 ("mm, oom: reorganize the oom report in dump_header") > > > > > > The patch looks correct but I think it is more complicated than it needs > > > to be. Can we do the following instead? > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > > > index 5a58778c91d4..f719b64741d6 100644 > > > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > > > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > > > @@ -987,8 +987,7 @@ static void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, const char *message) > > > /* > > > * Determines whether the kernel must panic because of the panic_on_oom sysctl. > > > */ > > > -static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, > > > - enum oom_constraint constraint) > > > +static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc) > > > { > > > if (likely(!sysctl_panic_on_oom)) > > > return; > > > @@ -998,7 +997,7 @@ static void check_panic_on_oom(struct oom_control *oc, > > > * does not panic for cpuset, mempolicy, or memcg allocation > > > * failures. > > > */ > > > - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) > > > + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_NONE) > > > return; > > > } > > > /* Do not panic for oom kills triggered by sysrq */ > > > @@ -1035,7 +1034,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(unregister_oom_notifier); > > > bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) > > > { > > > unsigned long freed = 0; > > > - enum oom_constraint constraint = CONSTRAINT_NONE; > > > > > > if (oom_killer_disabled) > > > return false; > > > @@ -1071,10 +1069,10 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) > > > * Check if there were limitations on the allocation (only relevant for > > > * NUMA and memcg) that may require different handling. > > > */ > > > - constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); > > > - if (constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) > > > + oc->constraint = constrained_alloc(oc); > > > + if (oc->constraint != CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY) > > > oc->nodemask = NULL; > > > - check_panic_on_oom(oc, constraint); > > > + check_panic_on_oom(oc); > > > > > > if (!is_memcg_oom(oc) && sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task && > > > current->mm && !oom_unkillable_task(current, NULL, oc->nodemask) && > > > > > > I guess the current confusion comes from the fact that we have > > > constraint both in the oom_control and a local variable so I would > > > rather remove that. What do you think? > > > > Remove the local variable is fine by me. > > Could you repost the patch with the changelog mentioning Fixes and the > simpler diff please? > > You can then add > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > Sure, I will. Thanks Yafang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-06-14 9:46 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-06-13 13:55 [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: set oc->constraint in constrained_alloc() Yafang Shao 2019-06-13 18:56 ` Michal Hocko 2019-06-14 5:58 ` Yafang Shao 2019-06-14 8:21 ` Michal Hocko 2019-06-14 9:46 ` Yafang Shao
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox