From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: oom: ignore oom warnings from memory.max
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 09:35:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200504073549.GE22838@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALOAHbCJBaa26m2cUkE0evwDnSFvUPrdBg9=WMjC7Yt_33-BJQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon 04-05-20 15:26:52, Yafang Shao wrote:
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 3:03 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri 01-05-20 09:39:24, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 2:27 AM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Lowering memory.max can trigger an oom-kill if the reclaim does not
> > > > succeed. However if oom-killer does not find a process for killing, it
> > > > dumps a lot of warnings.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I have been confused by this behavior for several months and I think
> > > it will confuse more memcg users.
> >
> > Could you be more specific what has caused the confusion?
> >
>
> No task is different from no eligible task.
> No eligible task means there are some candidates but no one is eligible.
> Whille no task means there is no candidate.
I really fail to see a difference. It is clear the one is subset of the
other but in practical life tasks might come and go at any time and if
you try to reduce the hard limit and there are no tasks that could be
reclaimed then I believe we should complain whether it is only oom
disabled tasks or no tasks at all. It is certainly unexpected situation
in some cases because there are resources which are bound to the memcg
without any task we can act on.
> > > We should keep the memcg oom behavior consistent with system oom - no
> > > oom kill if no process.
> >
> > This is not the global mmemcg behavior. We do complain loud on no
> > eligible tasks and actually panic the system. Memcg cannot simply
> > do the same by default for obvious reasons.
> >
>
> As explianed above, no eligible task is different from no task.
> If there are some candidates but no one is eligible, the system will panic.
> While if there's no task, it is definitely no OOM, because that's an
> improssible thing for the system.
This is very much possible situation when all eligible tasks have been
already killed but they didn't really help to resolve the oom situation
- e.g. in kernel memory leak or unbounded shmem consumption etc...
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-04 7:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-30 18:27 Shakeel Butt
2020-04-30 19:06 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-04-30 19:30 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-04-30 20:23 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-04-30 19:31 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-04-30 19:29 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-04-30 20:20 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 6:57 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 13:54 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-01 1:39 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-01 2:04 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-01 2:12 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-04 7:03 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 7:26 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-04 7:35 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-05-04 7:40 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-04 8:03 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 6:56 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 13:54 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 14:11 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 14:53 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 15:00 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 15:35 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 15:39 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-04 16:06 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 19:23 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-05 7:13 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-05 15:03 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-05 16:57 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-05-05 15:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-05-05 15:35 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-05 15:49 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-05 16:40 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-05-04 14:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-05-04 14:57 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 15:44 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=20200504073549.GE22838@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shakeelb@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