linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg] memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:42:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YT8PEBbYZhLixEJD@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9556c2ae-2dc8-9d0a-55de-002d674680bf@virtuozzo.com>

On Mon 13-09-21 11:29:37, Vasily Averin wrote:
> On 9/10/21 5:55 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 10-09-21 16:20:58, Vasily Averin wrote:
> >> On 9/10/21 4:04 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >>> Can't we add fatal_signal_pending(current) test to vmalloc() loop?
> > 
> > We can and we should.
> > 
> >> 1) this has been done in the past but has been reverted later.
> > 
> > The reason for that should be addressed IIRC.
> 
> I don't know the details of this, and I need some time to investigate it.

b8c8a338f75e ("Revert "vmalloc: back off when the current task is killed"")
should give a good insight and references.

> >> 2) any vmalloc changes will affect non-memcg allocations too.
> >>  If we're doing memcg-related checks it's better to do it in one place.
> > 
> > I think those two things are just orthogonal. Bailing out from vmalloc
> > early sounds reasonable to me on its own. Allocating a large thing that
> > is likely to go away with the allocating context is just a waste of
> > resources and potential reason to disruptions to others.
> 
> I doubt that fatal signal should block any vmalloc allocations.
> I assume there are situations where rollback of some cancelled operation uses vmalloc.
> Or coredump saving on some remote storage can uses vmalloc.

If there really are any such requirements then this should be really
documented. 

> However for me it's abnormal that even OOM-killer cannot cancel huge vmalloc allocation.
> So I think tsk_is_oom_victim(current) check should be added to vm_area_alloc_pages() 
> to break vmalloc cycle.

Why should oom killed task behave any different than any other task
killed without a way to handle the signal?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-13  8:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-10 12:39 [PATCH memcg] memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks Vasily Averin
2021-09-10 13:04 ` Tetsuo Handa
2021-09-10 13:20   ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-10 14:55     ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-13  8:29       ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-13  8:42         ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2021-09-17  8:06           ` [PATCH mm] vmalloc: back off when the current task is OOM-killed Vasily Averin
2021-09-19 23:31             ` Andrew Morton
2021-09-20  1:22               ` Tetsuo Handa
2021-09-20 10:59                 ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-21 18:55                   ` Andrew Morton
2021-09-22  6:18                     ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-22 12:27             ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-23  6:49               ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-24  7:55                 ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-27  9:36                   ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-27 11:08                     ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-05 13:52                       ` [PATCH mm v2] " Vasily Averin
2021-10-05 14:00                         ` Vasily Averin
2021-10-07 10:47                         ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-07 19:55                         ` Andrew Morton
2021-09-10 13:07 ` [PATCH memcg] memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks Vasily Averin
2021-09-13  7:51 ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-13  8:39   ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-13  9:37     ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-13 10:10       ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-13  8:53 ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-13 10:35   ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-13 10:55     ` Michal Hocko
2021-09-14 10:01       ` Vasily Averin
2021-09-14 10:10         ` [PATCH memcg v2] " Vasily Averin
2021-09-16 12:55           ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-05 13:52             ` [PATCH memcg v3] " Vasily Averin
2021-10-05 14:55               ` 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=YT8PEBbYZhLixEJD@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
    --cc=vvs@virtuozzo.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).