linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:23:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f7ac6711-4c9b-5603-7901-ae90a56a0d1a@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161201152517.27698-3-mhocko@kernel.org>

On 12/01/2016 04:25 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>
> __alloc_pages_may_oom makes sure to skip the OOM killer depending on
> the allocation request. This includes lowmem requests, costly high
> order requests and others. For a long time __GFP_NOFAIL acted as an
> override for all those rules. This is not documented and it can be quite
> surprising as well. E.g. GFP_NOFS requests are not invoking the OOM
> killer but GFP_NOFS|__GFP_NOFAIL does so if we try to convert some of
> the existing open coded loops around allocator to nofail request (and we
> have done that in the past) then such a change would have a non trivial
> side effect which is not obvious. Note that the primary motivation for
> skipping the OOM killer is to prevent from pre-mature invocation.
>
> The exception has been added by 82553a937f12 ("oom: invoke oom killer
> for __GFP_NOFAIL"). The changelog points out that the oom killer has to
> be invoked otherwise the request would be looping for ever. But this
> argument is rather weak because the OOM killer doesn't really guarantee
> any forward progress for those exceptional cases - e.g. it will hardly
> help to form costly order - I believe we certainly do not want to kill
> all processes and eventually panic the system just because there is a
> nasty driver asking for order-9 page with GFP_NOFAIL not realizing all
> the consequences - it is much better this request would loop for ever
> than the massive system disruption, lowmem is also highly unlikely to be
> freed during OOM killer and GFP_NOFS request could trigger while there
> is still a lot of memory pinned by filesystems.
>
> This patch simply removes the __GFP_NOFAIL special case in order to have
> a more clear semantic without surprising side effects. Instead we do
> allow nofail requests to access memory reserves to move forward in both
> cases when the OOM killer is invoked and when it should be supressed.
> __alloc_pages_nowmark helper has been introduced for that purpose.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-12-02  7:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-01 15:25 [PATCH 0/2] GFP_NOFAIL cleanups Michal Hocko
2016-12-01 15:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: consolidate GFP_NOFAIL checks in the allocator slowpath Michal Hocko
2016-12-01 15:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Michal Hocko
2016-12-02  7:23   ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2016-12-05 13:45   ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-12-05 14:10     ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-06  8:27       ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-06 10:38       ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-12-06 11:03         ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-12-06 19:25           ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-06 19:22         ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-08 12:53           ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-12-08 13:47             ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-11 11:23               ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-12-11 13:53                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-12-12  8:52                   ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-12  8:48                 ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-14 10:34                   ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-16  7:39 OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9 Michal Hocko
2016-12-16 15:58 ` OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko
2016-12-16 15:58   ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Michal Hocko
2016-12-16 17:31     ` Johannes Weiner
2016-12-16 22:12       ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-17 11:17         ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-12-18 16:37           ` 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=f7ac6711-4c9b-5603-7901-ae90a56a0d1a@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --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