From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f72.google.com (mail-pg0-f72.google.com [74.125.83.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CD566B0005 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 04:02:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pg0-f72.google.com with SMTP id o28so7209186pgn.6 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 01:02:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id h132sor4745879pfe.34.2018.01.30.01.02.55 for (Google Transport Security); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 01:02:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180130082817.cbax5qj4mxancx4b@node.shutemov.name> References: <001a1144b0caee2e8c0563d9de0a@google.com> <201801290020.w0T0KK8V015938@www262.sakura.ne.jp> <20180129072357.GD5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180129082649.sysf57wlp7i7ltb2@node.shutemov.name> <20180129165722.GF5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180129182811.fze4vrb5zd5cojmr@node.shutemov.name> <20180129223522.GG5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180130075226.GL21609@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180130081127.GH5906@breakpoint.cc> <20180130082817.cbax5qj4mxancx4b@node.shutemov.name> From: Dmitry Vyukov Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:02:34 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [netfilter-core] kernel panic: Out of memory and no killable processes... (2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: Florian Westphal , Michal Hocko , Tetsuo Handa , David Miller , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev , Andrea Arcangeli , Yang Shi , syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, LKML , Ingo Molnar , Linux-MM , David Rientjes , Andrew Morton , guro@fb.com, "Kirill A. Shutemov" On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: >> Michal Hocko wrote: >> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote: >> > > Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >> > [...] >> > > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here. >> > > > Not sure what exactly. >> > > >> > > Would memcg help? >> > >> > That really depends. I would have to check whether vmalloc path obeys >> > __GFP_ACCOUNT (I suspect it does except for page tables allocations but >> > that shouldn't be a big deal). But then the other potential problem is >> > the life time of the xt_table_info (or other potentially large) data >> > structures. Are they bound to any process life time. >> >> No. > > Well, IIUC they bound to net namespace life time, so killing all > proccesses in the namespace would help to get memory back. :) ... unless the namespace is mounted into file system. Let's start with NOWARN as that's what kernel generally uses for allocations with user-controllable size. ENOMEM is roughly as informative as the WARNING message in this case. I think we also need to consider setting up memory cgroup for syzkaller test processes (we do RLIMIT_AS, but that's weak). -- 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/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org