From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@quicinc.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
david@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: unreserve highatomic page blocks before oom
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 09:14:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <gtya2g2pdbsonelny6vpfwj5vsxdrzhi6wzkpcrke33mr3q2hf@j4ramnjmfx52> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1698669590-3193-1-git-send-email-quic_charante@quicinc.com>
On Mon 30-10-23 18:09:50, Charan Teja Kalla wrote:
> __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim() is called from slowpath allocation where
> high atomic reserves can be unreserved after there is a progress in
> reclaim and yet no suitable page is found. Later should_reclaim_retry()
> gets called from slow path allocation to decide if the reclaim needs to
> be retried before OOM kill path is taken.
>
> should_reclaim_retry() checks the available(reclaimable + free pages)
> memory against the min wmark levels of a zone and returns:
> a) true, if it is above the min wmark so that slow path allocation will
> do the reclaim retries.
> b) false, thus slowpath allocation takes oom kill path.
>
> should_reclaim_retry() can also unreserves the high atomic reserves
> **but only after all the reclaim retries are exhausted.**
>
> In a case where there are almost none reclaimable memory and free pages
> contains mostly the high atomic reserves but allocation context can't
> use these high atomic reserves, makes the available memory below min
> wmark levels hence false is returned from should_reclaim_retry() leading
> the allocation request to take OOM kill path. This is an early oom kill
> because high atomic reserves are holding lot of free memory and
> unreserving of them is not attempted.
OK, I see. So we do not release those reserved pages because OOM hits
too early.
> (early)OOM is encountered on a machine in the below state(excerpt from
> the oom kill logs):
> [ 295.998653] Normal free:7728kB boost:0kB min:804kB low:1004kB
> high:1204kB reserved_highatomic:8192KB active_anon:4kB inactive_anon:0kB
> active_file:24kB inactive_file:24kB unevictable:1220kB writepending:0kB
> present:70732kB managed:49224kB mlocked:0kB bounce:0kB free_pcp:688kB
> local_pcp:492kB free_cma:0kB
> [ 295.998656] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 32
> [ 295.998659] Normal: 508*4kB (UMEH) 241*8kB (UMEH) 143*16kB (UMEH)
> 33*32kB (UH) 7*64kB (UH) 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB
> 0*4096kB = 7752kB
OK, this is quite interesting as well. The system is really tiny and 8MB
of reserved memory is indeed really high. How come those reservations
have grown that high?
>
> Per above log, the free memory of ~7MB exist in the high atomic
> reserves is not freed up before falling back to oom kill path.
>
> This fix includes unreserving these atomic reserves in the OOM path
> before going for a kill. The side effect of unreserving in oom kill path
> is that these free pages are checked against the high wmark. If
> unreserved from should_reclaim_retry()/__alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(),
> they are checked against the min wmark levels.
I do not like the fix much TBH. I think the logic should live in
should_reclaim_retry. One way to approach it is to unreserve at the end
of the function, something like this:
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 95546f376302..d04e14adf2c5 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3813,10 +3813,8 @@ should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned order,
* Make sure we converge to OOM if we cannot make any progress
* several times in the row.
*/
- if (*no_progress_loops > MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES) {
- /* Before OOM, exhaust highatomic_reserve */
- return unreserve_highatomic_pageblock(ac, true);
- }
+ if (*no_progress_loops > MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES)
+ goto out;
/*
* Keep reclaiming pages while there is a chance this will lead
@@ -3859,6 +3857,12 @@ should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned order,
schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
else
cond_resched();
+
+out:
+ /* Before OOM, exhaust highatomic_reserve */
+ if (!ret)
+ return unreserve_highatomic_pageblock(ac, true);
+
return ret;
}
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-31 8:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-30 12:39 Charan Teja Kalla
2023-10-31 7:53 ` Pavan Kondeti
2023-10-31 8:14 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2023-10-31 13:13 ` Charan Teja Kalla
2023-10-31 13:43 ` Michal Hocko
2023-11-01 6:46 ` Pavan Kondeti
2023-11-01 6:53 ` Charan Teja Kalla
2023-11-01 9:41 ` 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=gtya2g2pdbsonelny6vpfwj5vsxdrzhi6wzkpcrke33mr3q2hf@j4ramnjmfx52 \
--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=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=quic_charante@quicinc.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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