From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] mm, oom: remove oom_lock from exit_mmap
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 19:38:21 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f648cbc0-fa8f-5cf5-5e2b-d9ee6d721cf2@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180716074410.GB17280@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2018/07/16 16:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> If setting MMF_OOM_SKIP is guarded by oom_lock, we can enforce
>> last second allocation attempt like below.
>>
>> CPU 0 CPU 1
>>
>> mutex_trylock(&oom_lock) in __alloc_pages_may_oom() succeeds.
>> get_page_from_freelist() fails.
>> Enters out_of_memory().
>>
>> __oom_reap_task_mm() reclaims some memory.
>> mutex_lock(&oom_lock);
>>
>> select_bad_process() does not select new victim because MMF_OOM_SKIP is not yet set.
>> Leaves out_of_memory().
>> mutex_unlock(&oom_lock) in __alloc_pages_may_oom() is called.
>>
>> Sets MMF_OOM_SKIP.
>> mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
>>
>> get_page_from_freelist() likely succeeds before reaching __alloc_pages_may_oom() again.
>> Saved one OOM victim from being needlessly killed.
>>
>> That is, guarding setting MMF_OOM_SKIP works as if synchronize_rcu(); it waits for anybody
>> who already acquired (or started waiting for) oom_lock to release oom_lock, in order to
>> prevent select_bad_process() from needlessly selecting new OOM victim.
>
> Hmm, is this a practical problem though? Do we really need to have a
> broader locking context just to defeat this race?
Yes, for you think that select_bad_process() might take long time. It is possible
that MMF_OOM_SKIP is set while the owner of oom_lock is preempted. It is not such
a small window that select_bad_process() finds an mm which got MMF_OOM_SKIP
immediately before examining that mm.
> How about this goes
> into a separate patch with some data justifying it?
>
No. We won't be able to get data until we let people test using released
kernels. I don't like again getting reports like
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1495034780-9520-1-git-send-email-guro@fb.com
by not guarding MMF_OOM_SKIP.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-16 10:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-12 21:34 David Rientjes
2018-07-13 6:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-07-13 14:26 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-13 21:18 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-07-16 6:13 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-16 7:04 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-07-16 7:44 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-16 10:38 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2018-07-16 11:15 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-17 4:22 ` David Rientjes
2018-07-17 4:14 ` 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=f648cbc0-fa8f-5cf5-5e2b-d9ee6d721cf2@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@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