From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
yosryahmed@google.com, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
shakeel.butt@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev, davidf@vimeo.com,
mkoutny@suse.com, paulmck@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
chenridong@huawei.com, wangweiyang2@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: revert watchdog reset in global OOM process
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:34:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bccc9e06-af8b-4a55-a69c-98596f1c1385@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d264a73e-966f-4890-9e23-88d476f0fc81@huaweicloud.com>
On 2/12/25 10:19, Chen Ridong wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/2/12 16:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Wed 12-02-25 02:57:07, Chen Ridong wrote:
>>> From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> Unlike memcg OOM, which is relatively common, global OOM events are rare
>>> and typically indicate that the entire system is under severe memory
>>> pressure. The commit ade81479c7dd ("memcg: fix soft lockup in the OOM
>>> process") added the touch_softlockup_watchdog in the global OOM handler to
>>> suppess the soft lockup issues. However, while this change can suppress
>>> soft lockup warnings, it does not address RCU stalls, which can still be
>>> detected and may cause unnecessary disturbances. Simply remove the
>>> modification from the global OOM handler.
>>>
>>> Fixes: ade81479c7dd ("memcg: fix soft lockup in the OOM process")
>>
>> But this is not really fixing anything, is it? While this doesn't
>> address a potential RCU stall it doesn't address any actual problem.
>> So why do we want to do this?
>>
>
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/cgroups/0d9ea655-5c1a-4ba9-9eeb-b45d74cc68d0@huaweicloud.com/
>
> As previously discussed, the work I have done on the global OOM is 'half
> of the job'. Based on our discussions, I thought that it would be best
> to abandon this approach for global OOM. Therefore, I am sending this
> patch to revert the changes.
>
> Or just leave it?
I suggested that part doesn't need to be in the patch, but if it was merged
with it, we can just leave it there. Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-12 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-12 2:57 Chen Ridong
2025-02-12 3:24 ` Chen Ridong
2025-02-12 8:57 ` Michal Hocko
2025-02-12 9:19 ` Chen Ridong
2025-02-12 9:34 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2025-02-12 9:52 ` Chen Ridong
2025-02-12 11:58 ` Michal Hocko
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=bccc9e06-af8b-4a55-a69c-98596f1c1385@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@huawei.com \
--cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=davidf@vimeo.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=wangweiyang2@huawei.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@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