From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: avoid livelock on !__GFP_FS allocations
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:10:05 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110251503490.26017@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1319524789-22818-1-git-send-email-ccross@android.com>
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Colin Cross wrote:
> Under the following conditions, __alloc_pages_slowpath can loop
> forever:
> gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT is true
> gfp_mask & __GFP_FS is false
> reclaim and compaction make no progress
> order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER
>
The oom killer is only called for __GFP_FS because we want to ensure that
we don't inadvertently kill something if we didn't have a chance to at
least make a good effort at direct reclaim. There's a very high liklihood
that direct reclaim would succeed with __GFP_FS, so we loop endlessly
waiting for either kswapd to reclaim in the background even though it
might not be able to because of filesystem locks or another allocation
happens in a context that allows reclaim to succeed or oom killing.
For low-order allocations (those at or below PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
where fragmentation isn't a huge issue, __GFP_WAIT && !__GFP_FS &&
!did_some_progress makes sense.
> These conditions happen very often during suspend and resume,
> when pm_restrict_gfp_mask() effectively converts all GFP_KERNEL
> allocations into __GFP_WAIT.
>
This is the problem. All allocations now have no chance of ever having
direct reclaim succeed nor the oom killer called. It seems like you would
want pm_restrict_gfp_mask() to also include __GFP_NORETRY and ensure it
can never be called for __GFP_NOFAIL.
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index fef8dc3..dcd99b3 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -2193,6 +2193,10 @@ rebalance:
> }
>
> goto restart;
> + } else {
> + /* If we aren't going to try the OOM killer, give up */
> + if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL))
> + goto nopage;
> }
> }
>
Nack on this, it is going to cause many very verbose allocation failures
(if !__GFP_NOWARN) when not using suspend because we're not in a context
where we can do sensible reclaim or compaction and presently kswapd can
either reclaim or another allocation will allow low-order amounts of
memory to be reclaimed or the oom killer to free some memory. It would
introduce a regression into page allocation.
--
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:[~2011-10-25 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-25 6:39 Colin Cross
2011-10-25 7:40 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-10-25 7:51 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-25 8:08 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-10-25 22:12 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-25 9:09 ` Mel Gorman
2011-10-25 9:26 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-25 11:23 ` Mel Gorman
2011-10-25 17:08 ` Colin Cross
2011-11-01 12:28 ` Mel Gorman
2011-10-25 19:39 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-11-01 12:29 ` Mel Gorman
2011-10-25 19:29 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-25 22:18 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 1:46 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-26 5:47 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 6:12 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 6:16 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-26 6:24 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 6:26 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-26 6:33 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 6:36 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-26 6:51 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 6:57 ` Colin Cross
2011-10-26 7:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-10-26 7:22 ` Colin Cross
2011-11-01 12:36 ` Mel Gorman
2011-10-25 22:10 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2011-11-14 14:04 Mel Gorman
2011-11-14 18:38 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-11-15 10:30 ` Mel Gorman
2011-11-14 23:03 ` Andrew Morton
2011-11-15 10:42 ` Mel Gorman
2011-11-15 15:43 ` Mel Gorman
2011-11-15 16:13 ` Minchan Kim
2011-11-15 17:36 ` Mel Gorman
2011-11-16 0:22 ` Minchan Kim
2011-11-16 0:28 ` Colin Cross
2011-11-16 0:45 ` Minchan Kim
2011-11-16 7:10 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-11-16 21:44 ` David Rientjes
2011-11-16 21:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-11-16 22:07 ` Minchan Kim
2011-11-16 22:48 ` David Rientjes
2011-11-15 21:40 ` David Rientjes
2011-11-16 9:52 ` Mel Gorman
2011-11-16 21:39 ` David Rientjes
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=alpine.DEB.2.00.1110251503490.26017@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ccross@android.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.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