All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, oom: do not schedule if current has been killed
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 02:03:44 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHGf_=pq_UJfr22kYC=vCyEDRKx75zt5eZ27+VcqFZFqc-KHTw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1206181930550.13293@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:31 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> The oom killer currently schedules away from current in an
> uninterruptible sleep if it does not have access to memory reserves.
> It's possible that current was killed because it shares memory with the
> oom killed thread or because it was killed by the user in the interim,
> however.
>
> This patch only schedules away from current if it does not have a pending
> kill, i.e. if it does not share memory with the oom killed thread, or is
> already exiting.  It's possible that it will immediately retry its memory
> allocation and fail, but it will immediately be given access to memory
> reserves if it calls the oom killer again.
>
> This prevents the delay of memory freeing when threads that share memory
> with the oom killed thread get unnecessarily scheduled.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> ---
>  mm/oom_kill.c |    7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -746,10 +746,11 @@ out:
>        read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
>
>        /*
> -        * Give "p" a good chance of killing itself before we
> +        * Give "p" a good chance of exiting before we
>         * retry to allocate memory unless "p" is current
>         */
> -       if (killed && !test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE))
> +       if (killed && !fatal_signal_pending(current) &&
> +                     !(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
>                schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
>  }

Why don't check gfp_flags? I think the rule is,

1) a thread of newly marked as TIF_MEMDIE
    -> now it has a capability to access reseve memory. let's immediately retry.
2) allocation for GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE
    -> we can fail to allocate it safely. let's immediately fail.
        (I suspect we need to change page allocator too)
3) GFP_KERNEL and PF_EXITING
    -> don't retry immediately. It shall fail again. let's wait until
killed process
        is exited.



> @@ -765,6 +766,6 @@ void pagefault_out_of_memory(void)
>                out_of_memory(NULL, 0, 0, NULL, false);
>                clear_system_oom();
>        }
> -       if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE))
> +       if (!fatal_signal_pending(current) && !(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
>                schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);

This makes sense to me.

--
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>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-06-19  6:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-19  1:08 [patch] mm, oom: do not schedule if current has been killed David Rientjes
2012-06-19  1:57 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-19  2:23   ` David Rientjes
2012-06-19  2:31     ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2012-06-19  2:51       ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-19  6:03       ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2012-06-19  6:26         ` David Rientjes
2012-06-19 17:32           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-06-19 18:59             ` David Rientjes
2012-06-19 19:29               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-06-19 13:55       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-06-19 20:24         ` David Rientjes
2012-06-19 20:58           ` [patch v3] " David Rientjes
2012-06-19 21:39             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-06-20  0:38               ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-21  1:23                 ` David Rientjes

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='CAHGf_=pq_UJfr22kYC=vCyEDRKx75zt5eZ27+VcqFZFqc-KHTw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --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: 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.