From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751660AbeA3Jbv (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 04:31:51 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]:39726 "EHLO mail-wm0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751405AbeA3Jbt (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 04:31:49 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227WmfL5iiFl5vyid9hpYvggfq/AM7J/MA7xNnFevbeg5xMQJcEW5UDP1eWJqaR1H1rb9s3SCA== Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:31:45 +0100 From: Daniel Vetter To: christian.koenig@amd.com Cc: Michal Hocko , Michel =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=E4nzer?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: [RFC] Per file OOM badness Message-ID: <20180130093145.GE25930@phenom.ffwll.local> Mail-Followup-To: christian.koenig@amd.com, Michal Hocko , Michel =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=E4nzer?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Roman Gushchin References: <20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180123152659.GA21817@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <20180123153631.GR1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180124092847.GI1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <583f328e-ff46-c6a4-8548-064259995766@daenzer.net> <20180124110141.GA28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> <36b49523-792d-45f9-8617-32b6d9d77418@daenzer.net> <20180124115059.GC28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> <381a868c-78fd-d0d1-029e-a2cf4ab06d37@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <381a868c-78fd-d0d1-029e-a2cf4ab06d37@gmail.com> X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 4.14.0-1-amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 01:11:09PM +0100, Christian König wrote: > Am 24.01.2018 um 12:50 schrieb Michal Hocko: > > On Wed 24-01-18 12:23:10, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > On 2018-01-24 12:01 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Wed 24-01-18 11:27:15, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > [...] > > > > > 2. If the OOM killer kills a process which is sharing BOs with another > > > > > process, this should result in the other process dropping its references > > > > > to the BOs as well, at which point the memory is released. > > > > OK. How exactly are those BOs mapped to the userspace? > > > I'm not sure what you're asking. Userspace mostly uses a GEM handle to > > > refer to a BO. There can also be userspace CPU mappings of the BO's > > > memory, but userspace doesn't need CPU mappings for all BOs and only > > > creates them as needed. > > OK, I guess you have to bear with me some more. This whole stack is a > > complete uknonwn. I am mostly after finding a boundary where you can > > charge the allocated memory to the process so that the oom killer can > > consider it. Is there anything like that? Except for the proposed file > > handle hack? > > Not that I knew of. > > As I said before we need some kind of callback that a process now starts to > use a file descriptor, but without anything from that file descriptor mapped > into the address space. For more context: With DRI3 and wayland the compositor opens the DRM fd and then passes it to the client, which then starts allocating stuff. That makes book-keeping rather annoying. I guess a good first order approximation would be if we simply charge any newly allocated buffers to the process that created them, but that means hanging onto lots of mm_struct pointers since we want to make sure we then release those pages to the right mm again (since the process that drops the last ref might be a totally different one, depending upon how the buffers or DRM fd have been shared). Would it be ok to hang onto potentially arbitrary mmget references essentially forever? If that's ok I think we can do your process based account (minus a few minor inaccuracies for shared stuff perhaps, but no one cares about that). -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f200.google.com (mail-wr0-f200.google.com [209.85.128.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F274D6B0006 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 04:31:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr0-f200.google.com with SMTP id d14so7718540wre.6 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 01:31:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f41.google.com (mail-sor-f41.google.com. [209.85.220.41]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id l34sor6346494eda.37.2018.01.30.01.31.48 for (Google Transport Security); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 01:31:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:31:45 +0100 From: Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [RFC] Per file OOM badness Message-ID: <20180130093145.GE25930@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180123152659.GA21817@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <20180123153631.GR1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180124092847.GI1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <583f328e-ff46-c6a4-8548-064259995766@daenzer.net> <20180124110141.GA28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> <36b49523-792d-45f9-8617-32b6d9d77418@daenzer.net> <20180124115059.GC28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> <381a868c-78fd-d0d1-029e-a2cf4ab06d37@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <381a868c-78fd-d0d1-029e-a2cf4ab06d37@gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: christian.koenig@amd.com Cc: Michal Hocko , Michel =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=E4nzer?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Roman Gushchin On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 01:11:09PM +0100, Christian Konig wrote: > Am 24.01.2018 um 12:50 schrieb Michal Hocko: > > On Wed 24-01-18 12:23:10, Michel Danzer wrote: > > > On 2018-01-24 12:01 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Wed 24-01-18 11:27:15, Michel Danzer wrote: > > [...] > > > > > 2. If the OOM killer kills a process which is sharing BOs with another > > > > > process, this should result in the other process dropping its references > > > > > to the BOs as well, at which point the memory is released. > > > > OK. How exactly are those BOs mapped to the userspace? > > > I'm not sure what you're asking. Userspace mostly uses a GEM handle to > > > refer to a BO. There can also be userspace CPU mappings of the BO's > > > memory, but userspace doesn't need CPU mappings for all BOs and only > > > creates them as needed. > > OK, I guess you have to bear with me some more. This whole stack is a > > complete uknonwn. I am mostly after finding a boundary where you can > > charge the allocated memory to the process so that the oom killer can > > consider it. Is there anything like that? Except for the proposed file > > handle hack? > > Not that I knew of. > > As I said before we need some kind of callback that a process now starts to > use a file descriptor, but without anything from that file descriptor mapped > into the address space. For more context: With DRI3 and wayland the compositor opens the DRM fd and then passes it to the client, which then starts allocating stuff. That makes book-keeping rather annoying. I guess a good first order approximation would be if we simply charge any newly allocated buffers to the process that created them, but that means hanging onto lots of mm_struct pointers since we want to make sure we then release those pages to the right mm again (since the process that drops the last ref might be a totally different one, depending upon how the buffers or DRM fd have been shared). Would it be ok to hang onto potentially arbitrary mmget references essentially forever? If that's ok I think we can do your process based account (minus a few minor inaccuracies for shared stuff perhaps, but no one cares about that). -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch -- 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: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [RFC] Per file OOM badness Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:31:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20180130093145.GE25930@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <20180118170006.GG6584@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180123152659.GA21817@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <20180123153631.GR1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180124092847.GI1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <583f328e-ff46-c6a4-8548-064259995766@daenzer.net> <20180124110141.GA28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> <36b49523-792d-45f9-8617-32b6d9d77418@daenzer.net> <20180124115059.GC28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> <381a868c-78fd-d0d1-029e-a2cf4ab06d37@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <381a868c-78fd-d0d1-029e-a2cf4ab06d37@gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: christian.koenig@amd.com Cc: Michal Hocko , Michel =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=E4nzer?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Roman Gushchin List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 01:11:09PM +0100, Christian König wrote: > Am 24.01.2018 um 12:50 schrieb Michal Hocko: > > On Wed 24-01-18 12:23:10, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > On 2018-01-24 12:01 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Wed 24-01-18 11:27:15, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > [...] > > > > > 2. If the OOM killer kills a process which is sharing BOs with another > > > > > process, this should result in the other process dropping its references > > > > > to the BOs as well, at which point the memory is released. > > > > OK. How exactly are those BOs mapped to the userspace? > > > I'm not sure what you're asking. Userspace mostly uses a GEM handle to > > > refer to a BO. There can also be userspace CPU mappings of the BO's > > > memory, but userspace doesn't need CPU mappings for all BOs and only > > > creates them as needed. > > OK, I guess you have to bear with me some more. This whole stack is a > > complete uknonwn. I am mostly after finding a boundary where you can > > charge the allocated memory to the process so that the oom killer can > > consider it. Is there anything like that? Except for the proposed file > > handle hack? > > Not that I knew of. > > As I said before we need some kind of callback that a process now starts to > use a file descriptor, but without anything from that file descriptor mapped > into the address space. For more context: With DRI3 and wayland the compositor opens the DRM fd and then passes it to the client, which then starts allocating stuff. That makes book-keeping rather annoying. I guess a good first order approximation would be if we simply charge any newly allocated buffers to the process that created them, but that means hanging onto lots of mm_struct pointers since we want to make sure we then release those pages to the right mm again (since the process that drops the last ref might be a totally different one, depending upon how the buffers or DRM fd have been shared). Would it be ok to hang onto potentially arbitrary mmget references essentially forever? If that's ok I think we can do your process based account (minus a few minor inaccuracies for shared stuff perhaps, but no one cares about that). -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch -- 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: email@kvack.org