From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
dave.hansen@intel.com, ying.huang@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] mm: fix OOMs for binding workloads to movable zone only node
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 17:16:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201105161612.GM21348@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201105134305.GA16424@shbuild999.sh.intel.com>
On Thu 05-11-20 21:43:05, Feng Tang wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 02:12:45PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 05-11-20 21:07:10, Feng Tang wrote:
> > [...]
> > > My debug traces shows it is, and its gfp_mask is 'GFP_KERNEL'
> >
> > Can you provide the full information please? Which node has been
> > requested. Which cpuset the calling process run in and which node has
> > the allocation succeeded from? A bare dump_stack without any further
> > context is not really helpful.
>
> I don't have the same platform as the original report, so I simulated
> one similar setup (with fakenuma and movablecore), which has 2 memory
> nodes: node 0 has DMA0/DMA32/Movable zones, while node 1 has only
> Movable zone. With it, I can got the same error and same oom callstack
> as the original report (as in the cover-letter).
>
> The test command is:
> # docker run -it --rm --cpuset-mems 1 ubuntu:latest bash -c "grep Mems_allowed /proc/self/status"
>
> To debug I only added some trace in the __alloc_pages_nodemask(), and
> for the callstack which get the page successfully:
>
> [ 567.510903] Call Trace:
> [ 567.510909] dump_stack+0x74/0x9a
> [ 567.510910] __alloc_pages_nodemask.cold+0x22/0xe5
> [ 567.510913] alloc_pages_current+0x87/0xe0
> [ 567.510914] __vmalloc_node_range+0x14c/0x240
> [ 567.510918] module_alloc+0x82/0xe0
> [ 567.510921] bpf_jit_alloc_exec+0xe/0x10
> [ 567.510922] bpf_jit_binary_alloc+0x7a/0x120
> [ 567.510925] bpf_int_jit_compile+0x145/0x424
> [ 567.510926] bpf_prog_select_runtime+0xac/0x130
As already said this doesn't really tell much without the additional
information.
> The incomming parameter nodemask is NULL, and the function will first try the
> cpuset nodemask (1 here), and the zoneidx is only granted 2, which makes the
> 'ac's preferred zone to be NULL. so it goes into __alloc_pages_slowpath(),
> which will first set the nodemask to 'NULL', and this time it got a preferred
> zone: zone DMA32 from node 0, following get_page_from_freelist will allocate
> one page from that zone.
I do not follow. Both hot and slow paths of the allocator set
ALLOC_CPUSET or emulate it by mems_allowed when cpusets are nebaled
IIRC. This is later enforced in get_page_from_free_list. There are some
exceptions when the allocating process can run away from its cpusets -
e.g. IRQs, OOM victims and few other cases but definitely not a random
allocation. There might be some subtle details that have changed or I
might have forgot but
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-05 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-04 6:10 Feng Tang
2020-11-04 6:10 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: dump meminfo for all memory nodes Feng Tang
2020-11-04 7:18 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-04 6:10 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, page_alloc: loose the node binding check to avoid helpless oom killing Feng Tang
2020-11-04 7:23 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-04 7:13 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] mm: fix OOMs for binding workloads to movable zone only node Michal Hocko
2020-11-04 7:38 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-04 7:58 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-04 8:40 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-04 8:53 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20201105014028.GA86777@shbuild999.sh.intel.com>
2020-11-05 12:08 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-05 12:53 ` Vlastimil Babka
2020-11-05 12:58 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-05 13:07 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-05 13:12 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-05 13:43 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-05 16:16 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-11-06 7:06 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-06 8:10 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-06 9:08 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-06 10:35 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-05 13:14 ` Vlastimil Babka
2020-11-05 13:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-05 13:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2020-11-06 4:32 ` Huang, Ying
2020-11-06 7:43 ` 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=20201105161612.GM21348@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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