From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Joel Savitz <jsavitz@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
Christoph von Recklinghausen <crecklin@redhat.com>,
Don Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>,
"Herton R . Krzesinski" <herton@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
Andre Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] mm/oom_kill.c: futex: Close a race between do_exit and the oom_reaper
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:18:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YkQgWcZ7w0zL1a7n@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YjrlqAMyJg3GKZVs@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Nico,
On Wed 23-03-22 10:17:29, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Let me skip over futex part which I need to digest and only focus on the
> oom side of the things for clarification.
>
> On Tue 22-03-22 23:43:18, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
[...]
> > You can easily validate that by doing:
> >
> > wake_oom_reaper(task)
> > task->reap_time = jiffies + HZ;
> > queue_task(task);
> > wakeup(reaper);
> >
> > and then:
> >
> > oom_reap_task(task)
> > now = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
> > if (time_before(now, task->reap_time)
> > schedule_timeout_idle(task->reap_time - now);
> >
> > before trying to actually reap the mm.
> >
> > That will prevent the enforced race in most cases and allow the exiting
> > and/or killed processes to cleanup themself. Not pretty, but it should
> > reduce the chance of the reaper to win the race with the exiting and/or
> > killed process significantly.
> >
> > It's not going to work when the problem is combined with a heavy VM
> > overload situation which keeps a guest (or one/some it's vCPUs) away
> > from being scheduled. See below for a discussion of guarantees.
> >
> > If it failed to do so when the sleep returns, then you still can reap
> > it.
>
> Yes, this is certainly an option. Please note that the oom_reaper is not
> the only way to trigger this. process_mrelease syscall performs the same
> operation from the userspace. Arguably process_mrelease could be used
> sanely/correctly because the userspace oom killer can do pro-cleanup
> steps before going to final SIGKILL & process_mrelease. One way would be
> to send SIGTERM in the first step and allow the victim to perform its
> cleanup.
are you working on another version of the fix/workaround based on the
discussion so far?
I guess the most reasonable way forward is to rework
oom_reaper processing to be delayed. This can be either done by a
delayed wake up or as Thomas suggests above by postponing the
processing. I think the delayed wakeup would be _slightly_ easier to
handle because the queue can contain many tasks to be reaped.
More specifically something like delayed work but we cannot rely on
the WQ here. I guess we do not have any delayed wait queue interface
but the same trick with the timer should be applicable here as well.
exit_mmap would then cancel the timer after __oom_reap_task_mm is done.
Actually the timer could be canceled after mmu_notifier_release already
but this shouldn't make much of a difference.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-30 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-18 3:36 Nico Pache
2022-03-21 8:55 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-21 22:45 ` Nico Pache
[not found] ` <20220322004231.rwmnbjpq4ms6fnbi@offworld>
2022-03-22 1:53 ` Nico Pache
[not found] ` <20220322025724.j3japdo5qocwgchz@offworld>
2022-03-22 3:09 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-22 8:26 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-22 15:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-22 16:36 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-22 22:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 9:17 ` Michal Hocko
2022-03-23 10:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 11:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-30 9:18 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2022-03-30 18:18 ` Nico Pache
2022-03-30 21:36 ` Nico Pache
2022-04-06 17:22 ` Nico Pache
2022-04-06 17:36 ` Nico Pache
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=YkQgWcZ7w0zL1a7n@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@collabora.com \
--cc=aquini@redhat.com \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=crecklin@redhat.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=ddutile@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=herton@redhat.com \
--cc=jsavitz@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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