From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, caiqian@redhat.com,
rientjes@google.com, hughd@google.com,
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, minchan.kim@gmail.com,
oleg@redhat.com
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] oom: don't kill random process
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:48:46 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E01C88E.3070806@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E01C7D5.3060603@jp.fujitsu.com>
CAI Qian reported oom-killer killed all system daemons in his
system at first if he ran fork bomb as root. The problem is,
current logic give them bonus of 3% of system ram. Example,
he has 16GB machine, then root processes have ~500MB oom
immune. It bring us crazy bad result. _all_ processes have
oom-score=1 and then, oom killer ignore process memroy usage
and kill random process. This regression is caused by commit
a63d83f427 (oom: badness heuristic rewrite).
This patch changes select_bad_process() slightly. If oom points == 1,
it's a sign that the system have only root privileged processes or
similar. Thus, select_bad_process() calculate oom badness without
root bonus and select eligible process.
Also, this patch move finding sacrifice child logic into
select_bad_process(). It's necessary to implement adequate
no root bonus recalculation. and it makes good side effect,
current logic doesn't behave as the doc.
Documentation/sysctl/vm.txt says
oom_kill_allocating_task
If this is set to non-zero, the OOM killer simply kills the task that
triggered the out-of-memory condition. This avoids the expensive
tasklist scan.
IOW, oom_kill_allocating_task shouldn't search sacrifice child.
This patch also fixes this issue.
Reported-by: CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
fs/proc/base.c | 2 +-
include/linux/oom.h | 3 +-
mm/oom_kill.c | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
index 4a10763..5e4a8a1 100644
--- a/fs/proc/base.c
+++ b/fs/proc/base.c
@@ -485,7 +485,7 @@ static int proc_oom_score(struct task_struct *task, char *buffer)
read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
if (pid_alive(task)) {
- points = oom_badness(task, NULL, NULL, totalpages);
+ points = oom_badness(task, NULL, NULL, totalpages, 1);
ratio = points * 1000 / totalpages;
}
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
index 75b104c..272e3bb 100644
--- a/include/linux/oom.h
+++ b/include/linux/oom.h
@@ -43,7 +43,8 @@ enum oom_constraint {
extern int test_set_oom_score_adj(int new_val);
extern unsigned long oom_badness(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem,
- const nodemask_t *nodemask, unsigned long totalpages);
+ const nodemask_t *nodemask, unsigned long totalpages,
+ int protect_root);
extern int try_set_zonelist_oom(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_flags);
extern void clear_zonelist_oom(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_flags);
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index cff8000..cf48fd5 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -160,7 +160,8 @@ static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p,
* task consuming the most memory to avoid subsequent oom failures.
*/
unsigned long oom_badness(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem,
- const nodemask_t *nodemask, unsigned long totalpages)
+ const nodemask_t *nodemask, unsigned long totalpages,
+ int protect_root)
{
unsigned long points;
unsigned long score_adj = 0;
@@ -198,7 +199,7 @@ unsigned long oom_badness(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem,
task_unlock(p);
/* Root processes get 3% bonus. */
- if (task_euid(p) == 0) {
+ if (protect_root && task_euid(p) == 0) {
if (points >= totalpages / 32)
points -= totalpages / 32;
else
@@ -310,8 +311,11 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
{
struct task_struct *g, *p;
struct task_struct *chosen = NULL;
- *ppoints = 0;
+ int protect_root = 1;
+ unsigned long chosen_points = 0;
+ struct task_struct *child;
+ retry:
do_each_thread_reverse(g, p) {
unsigned long points;
@@ -344,7 +348,7 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
*/
if (p == current) {
chosen = p;
- *ppoints = ULONG_MAX;
+ chosen_points = ULONG_MAX;
} else {
/*
* If this task is not being ptraced on exit,
@@ -357,13 +361,49 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
}
}
- points = oom_badness(p, mem, nodemask, totalpages);
- if (points > *ppoints) {
+ points = oom_badness(p, mem, nodemask, totalpages, protect_root);
+ if (points > chosen_points) {
chosen = p;
- *ppoints = points;
+ chosen_points = points;
}
} while_each_thread(g, p);
+ /*
+ * chosen_point==1 may be a sign that root privilege bonus is too large
+ * and we choose wrong task. Let's recalculate oom score without the
+ * dubious bonus.
+ */
+ if (protect_root && (chosen_points == 1)) {
+ protect_root = 0;
+ goto retry;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * If any of p's children has a different mm and is eligible for kill,
+ * the one with the highest badness() score is sacrificed for its
+ * parent. This attempts to lose the minimal amount of work done while
+ * still freeing memory.
+ */
+ g = p = chosen;
+ do {
+ list_for_each_entry(child, &p->children, sibling) {
+ unsigned long child_points;
+
+ if (child->mm == p->mm)
+ continue;
+ /*
+ * oom_badness() returns 0 if the thread is unkillable
+ */
+ child_points = oom_badness(child, mem, nodemask,
+ totalpages, protect_root);
+ if (child_points > chosen_points) {
+ chosen = child;
+ chosen_points = child_points;
+ }
+ }
+ } while_each_thread(g, p);
+
+ *ppoints = chosen_points;
return chosen;
}
@@ -479,11 +519,6 @@ static int oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *p, gfp_t gfp_mask, int order,
struct mem_cgroup *mem, nodemask_t *nodemask,
const char *message)
{
- struct task_struct *victim = p;
- struct task_struct *child;
- struct task_struct *t = p;
- unsigned long victim_points = 0;
-
if (printk_ratelimit())
dump_header(p, gfp_mask, order, mem, nodemask);
@@ -497,35 +532,11 @@ static int oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *p, gfp_t gfp_mask, int order,
}
task_lock(p);
- pr_err("%s: Kill process %d (%s) points %lu or sacrifice child\n",
- message, task_pid_nr(p), p->comm, points);
+ pr_err("%s: Kill process %d (%s) points %lu\n",
+ message, task_pid_nr(p), p->comm, points);
task_unlock(p);
- /*
- * If any of p's children has a different mm and is eligible for kill,
- * the one with the highest badness() score is sacrificed for its
- * parent. This attempts to lose the minimal amount of work done while
- * still freeing memory.
- */
- do {
- list_for_each_entry(child, &t->children, sibling) {
- unsigned long child_points;
-
- if (child->mm == p->mm)
- continue;
- /*
- * oom_badness() returns 0 if the thread is unkillable
- */
- child_points = oom_badness(child, mem, nodemask,
- totalpages);
- if (child_points > victim_points) {
- victim = child;
- victim_points = child_points;
- }
- }
- } while_each_thread(p, t);
-
- return oom_kill_task(victim, mem);
+ return oom_kill_task(p, mem);
}
/*
--
1.7.3.1
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-22 10:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-22 10:45 [PATCH v3 0/6] Fix oom killer doesn't work at all if system have > gigabytes memory (aka CAI founded issue) KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-22 10:46 ` [PATCH 1/6] oom: use euid instead of CAP_SYS_ADMIN for protection root process KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-22 22:57 ` David Rientjes
2011-06-22 10:47 ` [PATCH 2/6] oom: improve dump_tasks() show items KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-22 22:59 ` David Rientjes
2011-06-22 10:47 ` [PATCH 3/6] oom: kill younger process first KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-22 23:01 ` David Rientjes
2011-06-22 10:48 ` [PATCH 4/6] oom: oom-killer don't use proportion of system-ram internally KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-22 23:16 ` David Rientjes
2011-06-22 10:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2011-06-22 23:22 ` [PATCH 5/6] oom: don't kill random process David Rientjes
2011-06-22 10:49 ` [PATCH 6/6] oom: merge oom_kill_process() with oom_kill_task() KOSAKI Motohiro
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=4E01C88E.3070806@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=caiqian@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--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