From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: "Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)" <lizhijian@fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Yasunori Gotou (Fujitsu)" <y-goto@fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: Avoid triggering oom-killer during memory hot-remove operations
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 11:16:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zqdd25XhcEDPEQIS@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <280af822-577f-468b-953f-b70190551b6f@fujitsu.com>
On Mon 29-07-24 08:53:11, Zhijian Li (Fujitsu) wrote:
[...]
> >>>> [13853.758192] pagefault_out_of_memory: 4055 callbacks suppressed
> >>>> [13853.758243] Huh VM_FAULT_OOM leaked out to the #PF handler. Retrying PF
> >>>
> >>> This shouldn't really happen and it indicates that some memory
> >>> allocation in the pagefault path has failed.
> >>
> >> May I know if this will cause side effect to other processes.
> >
> > This eill mean that the #PF handler has failed to allocate memory and
> > the VM_FAULT_OOM error has unwound all the way up to the exception
> > handler and that will restart the instruction that has caused the #PF.
> > > In essence, as long as the process triggering this is not killed or the
> > allocation doesn't suceed it will be looping in the #PF path. This
> > normally doesn't happen because our allocators do not fail for small
> > allocation requests.
>
> Thanks again for your detailed explanation.
>
> I think this is acceptable for the process bound to the being removed node, isn't it?
It shouldn't be happening really. This is a sign that something doesn't
behave properly. E.g. some of the #PF returning VM_FAULT_OOM without
calling into the allocator.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-29 9:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-26 8:44 Li Zhijian
2024-07-26 9:17 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-29 0:37 ` Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)
2024-07-29 2:14 ` Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)
2024-07-29 6:13 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-29 6:34 ` Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)
2024-07-29 7:40 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-29 8:04 ` Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)
2024-07-29 8:15 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-29 8:53 ` Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)
2024-07-29 9:16 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
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=Zqdd25XhcEDPEQIS@tiehlicka \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizhijian@fujitsu.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=y-goto@fujitsu.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