From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, oleg@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom: consider multi-threaded tasks in task_will_free_mem Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:45:20 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20160413134520.GK14351@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <201604132227.BDI51567.VMOFOHFOLQtSFJ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> On Wed 13-04-16 22:27:52, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > > The whole thread group is going down does not mean we make sure that > > > we will send SIGKILL to other thread groups sharing the same memory which > > > is possibly holding mmap_sem for write, does it? > > > > And the patch description doesn't say anything about processes sharing > > mm. This is supposed to be a minor fix of an obviously suboptimal > > behavior of task_will_free_mem. Can we stick to the proposed patch, > > please? > > > > If we really do care about processes sharing mm _that_much_ then it > > should be handled in the separate patch. > > I do care. then feel free to post a patch. I believe such a change should be handled in a separate patch. I have intentionally layed out the code in a way to allow further checks easily. Separate processes sharing the same mm have lower priority for me because I do not know of any recent userspace which would use this strange threading model or do you have anything specific in mind which would make it more real-life? We will get to this eventually. > The OOM reaper cannot work unless SIGKILL is sent to a thread > which is holding mmap_sem for write. Thus, sending SIGKILL to all thread > groups sharing the mm is needed by your down_write_killable(&mm->mmap_sem) > changes. Like I wrote at > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201604092300.BDI39040.FFSQLJOMHOOVtF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp , > we cannot fix that problem unless you accept the slowpath. > > I don't like you don't explain your approach for handling the slowpath. > If you explain your approach for handling the slowpath and I agree on > your approach, I will also agree on the proposed patches. I would much appreciate if you _stopped_ conflating different things together. This is just generating a lot of fuzz and slows the overal progress. -- 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, oleg@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom: consider multi-threaded tasks in task_will_free_mem Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:45:20 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20160413134520.GK14351@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <201604132227.BDI51567.VMOFOHFOLQtSFJ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> On Wed 13-04-16 22:27:52, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > > The whole thread group is going down does not mean we make sure that > > > we will send SIGKILL to other thread groups sharing the same memory which > > > is possibly holding mmap_sem for write, does it? > > > > And the patch description doesn't say anything about processes sharing > > mm. This is supposed to be a minor fix of an obviously suboptimal > > behavior of task_will_free_mem. Can we stick to the proposed patch, > > please? > > > > If we really do care about processes sharing mm _that_much_ then it > > should be handled in the separate patch. > > I do care. then feel free to post a patch. I believe such a change should be handled in a separate patch. I have intentionally layed out the code in a way to allow further checks easily. Separate processes sharing the same mm have lower priority for me because I do not know of any recent userspace which would use this strange threading model or do you have anything specific in mind which would make it more real-life? We will get to this eventually. > The OOM reaper cannot work unless SIGKILL is sent to a thread > which is holding mmap_sem for write. Thus, sending SIGKILL to all thread > groups sharing the mm is needed by your down_write_killable(&mm->mmap_sem) > changes. Like I wrote at > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201604092300.BDI39040.FFSQLJOMHOOVtF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp , > we cannot fix that problem unless you accept the slowpath. > > I don't like you don't explain your approach for handling the slowpath. > If you explain your approach for handling the slowpath and I agree on > your approach, I will also agree on the proposed patches. I would much appreciate if you _stopped_ conflating different things together. This is just generating a lot of fuzz and slows the overal progress. -- 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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-13 13:45 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2016-04-12 9:19 [PATCH] oom: consider multi-threaded tasks in task_will_free_mem Michal Hocko 2016-04-12 9:19 ` Michal Hocko 2016-04-13 11:04 ` Tetsuo Handa 2016-04-13 11:04 ` Tetsuo Handa 2016-04-13 13:08 ` Michal Hocko 2016-04-13 13:08 ` Michal Hocko 2016-04-13 13:27 ` Tetsuo Handa 2016-04-13 13:27 ` Tetsuo Handa 2016-04-13 13:45 ` Michal Hocko [this message] 2016-04-13 13:45 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-17 18:06 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-05-17 18:06 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-04-26 13:57 ` Michal Hocko 2016-04-26 13:57 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-17 20:28 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-17 20:28 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-17 22:21 ` Andrew Morton 2016-05-17 22:21 ` Andrew Morton 2016-05-18 7:16 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-18 7:16 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-17 18:42 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-05-17 18:42 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-05-17 20:25 ` Michal Hocko 2016-05-17 20:25 ` 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=20160413134520.GK14351@dhcp22.suse.cz \ --to=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=oleg@redhat.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: linkBe 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.