All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de, rientjes@google.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, oleg@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
	andrea@kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sysrq: ensure manual invocation of the OOM killer under OOM livelock
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:22:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160105162246.GH15324@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201512301533.JDJ18237.QOFOMVSFtHOJLF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Wed 30-12-15 15:33:47, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >From 7fcac2054b33dc3df6c5915a58f232b9b80bb1e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:24:40 +0900
> Subject: [RFC][PATCH] sysrq: ensure manual invocation of the OOM killer under OOM livelock
> 
> This patch is similar to what commit 373ccbe5927034b5 ("mm, vmstat:
> allow WQ concurrency to discover memory reclaim doesn't make any
> progress") does, but this patch is for SysRq-f.
>
> SysRq-f is a method for reclaiming memory by manually invoking the OOM
> killer. Therefore, it needs to be invokable even when the system is
> looping under OOM livelock condition.

Yes this makes a lot of sense and thanks for doing it. I have it on my
todo list but didn't get to it yet. I guess this is not only sysrq+f
specific though. What about emergency reboot or manual crash invocation?

I think all of them deserve an immediate action and so they should share
the same wq.
 
> While making sure that we give workqueue items a chance to run is
> done by "mm,oom: Always sleep before retrying." patch, allocating
> a dedicated workqueue only for SysRq-f might be too wasteful when
> there is the OOM reaper kernel thread which will be idle when
> we need to use SysRq-f due to OOM livelock condition.
> 
> I wish for a kernel thread that does OOM-kill operation.
> Maybe we can change the OOM reaper kernel thread to do it.
> What do you think?

I do no think a separate kernel thread would help much if the
allocations have to keep looping in the allocator. oom_reaper is a
separate kernel thread only due to locking required for the exit_mmap
path.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de, rientjes@google.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, oleg@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
	andrea@kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sysrq: ensure manual invocation of the OOM killer under OOM livelock
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:22:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160105162246.GH15324@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201512301533.JDJ18237.QOFOMVSFtHOJLF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Wed 30-12-15 15:33:47, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >From 7fcac2054b33dc3df6c5915a58f232b9b80bb1e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:24:40 +0900
> Subject: [RFC][PATCH] sysrq: ensure manual invocation of the OOM killer under OOM livelock
> 
> This patch is similar to what commit 373ccbe5927034b5 ("mm, vmstat:
> allow WQ concurrency to discover memory reclaim doesn't make any
> progress") does, but this patch is for SysRq-f.
>
> SysRq-f is a method for reclaiming memory by manually invoking the OOM
> killer. Therefore, it needs to be invokable even when the system is
> looping under OOM livelock condition.

Yes this makes a lot of sense and thanks for doing it. I have it on my
todo list but didn't get to it yet. I guess this is not only sysrq+f
specific though. What about emergency reboot or manual crash invocation?

I think all of them deserve an immediate action and so they should share
the same wq.
 
> While making sure that we give workqueue items a chance to run is
> done by "mm,oom: Always sleep before retrying." patch, allocating
> a dedicated workqueue only for SysRq-f might be too wasteful when
> there is the OOM reaper kernel thread which will be idle when
> we need to use SysRq-f due to OOM livelock condition.
> 
> I wish for a kernel thread that does OOM-kill operation.
> Maybe we can change the OOM reaper kernel thread to do it.
> What do you think?

I do no think a separate kernel thread would help much if the
allocations have to keep looping in the allocator. oom_reaper is a
separate kernel thread only due to locking required for the exit_mmap
path.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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:[~2016-01-05 16:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-30  6:33 [RFC][PATCH] sysrq: ensure manual invocation of the OOM killer under OOM livelock Tetsuo Handa
2015-12-30  6:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-01-05 16:22 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-01-05 16:22   ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-05 17:38   ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-05 17:38     ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-05 18:05   ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-05 18:05     ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-06 11:49     ` [RFC][PATCH] sysrq: ensure manual invocation of the OOM killerunder " Tetsuo Handa
2016-01-06 11:49       ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-01-06 13:17       ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-06 13:17         ` 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=20160105162246.GH15324@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andrea@kernel.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.