linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: prevent soft lockup on memcg oom for UP systems
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:34:53 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2003101724010.197777@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200310171802.128129f6817ef3f77d230ccd@linux-foundation.org>

On Tue, 10 Mar 2020, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -2637,6 +2637,8 @@ static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> >  		unsigned long reclaimed;
> >  		unsigned long scanned;
> >  
> > +		cond_resched();
> > +
> >  		switch (mem_cgroup_protected(target_memcg, memcg)) {
> >  		case MEMCG_PROT_MIN:
> >  			/*
> 
> 
> Obviously better, but this will still spin wheels until this tasks's
> timeslice expires, and we might want to do something to help ensure
> that the victim runs next (or soon)?
> 

We used to have a schedule_timeout_killable(1) to address exactly that 
scenario but it was removed in 4.19:

commit 9bfe5ded054b8e28a94c78580f233d6879a00146
Author: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Date:   Fri Aug 17 15:49:04 2018 -0700

    mm, oom: remove sleep from under oom_lock

This is why we don't see this issue on 4.14 guests but we do on 4.19.  I 
had assumed the issue Tetsuo reported that resulted in that patch was 
still an issue and I preferred to fix the weird UP issue by adding a 
cond_resched() that is likely needed for the iteration in 
shrink_node_memcg() anyway.  Do we care to optimize for UP systems 
encountering memcg oom kills?  Eh, maybe, but I'm not very interested in 
opening up a centithread about this.

> (And why is shrink_node_memcgs compiled in when CONFIG_MEMCG=n?)
> 

This guest does have CONFIG_MEMCG enabled, it's a memcg oom condition.

But unrelated to this patch, I think it's just a weird naming for it.  The 
do-while loop in shrink_node_memcgs() actually uses memcg = NULL for the 
non-memcg case and is responsible for calling into page and slab reclaim.


  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-11  0:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-10 21:39 [patch] mm, oom: prevent soft lockup on memcg oom for UP systems David Rientjes
2020-03-10 22:05 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-10 22:55   ` David Rientjes
2020-03-11  9:34     ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-11 19:38       ` David Rientjes
2020-03-11 22:04         ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-11 22:14           ` David Rientjes
2020-03-12  0:12             ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-12 18:07               ` David Rientjes
2020-03-12 22:32                 ` Andrew Morton
2020-03-16  9:31                   ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-16 10:04                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-16 10:14                       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-13  0:15                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-13 22:01                   ` David Rientjes
2020-03-13 23:15                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-13 23:32                       ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-16 23:59                         ` David Rientjes
2020-03-17  3:18                           ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-17  4:09                             ` David Rientjes
2020-03-18  0:55                               ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2020-03-18  9:42                                 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-18 21:40                                   ` David Rientjes
2020-03-18 22:03                                     ` [patch v3] " David Rientjes
2020-03-19  7:09                                       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-12  4:23             ` [patch] " Tetsuo Handa
2020-03-10 22:10 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-10 23:02   ` David Rientjes
2020-03-11  8:27     ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-11 19:45       ` David Rientjes
2020-03-12  8:32         ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-12 18:20           ` David Rientjes
2020-03-12 20:16             ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-16  9:32               ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-11  0:18 ` Andrew Morton
2020-03-11  0:34   ` David Rientjes [this message]
2020-03-11  8:36   ` 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=alpine.DEB.2.21.2003101724010.197777@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
    --to=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).