From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B143C433F5 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4364E61029 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238938AbhIMKLp (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2021 06:11:45 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.220.28]:59978 "EHLO smtp-out1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238155AbhIMKLn (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2021 06:11:43 -0400 Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 129D621C86; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:10:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1631527827; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=AiRkX0WmNs9gJZTMmdh3igwoaOgGldencFjuU/XzQXk=; b=M61ke4OyiDAoRXUd/MfdBGLxA4SX0zHRwS1SjPCxfp063hQwZJ7OSV6psRSojdguit9QyG iHP4GtWWQ++oWv9UpWiB9r2qPGdaulPhnclxsoTsM5mu6uSwe/7KD/SQKy4eyi8aZO04SP yEC2qXYXa3JX5nS6ebbH9gUVva5zRAc= Received: from suse.cz (unknown [10.100.201.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E09DA3B84; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 12:10:25 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Vasily Averin Cc: Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Tetsuo Handa , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg] memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks Message-ID: References: <5b06a490-55bc-a6a0-6c85-690254f86fad@virtuozzo.com> <8b98d44a-aeb2-5f5f-2545-ac2bd0c7049b@virtuozzo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 13-09-21 12:37:56, Vasily Averin wrote: > On 9/13/21 11:39 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 13-09-21 10:51:37, Vasily Averin wrote: > >> On 9/10/21 3:39 PM, Vasily Averin wrote: > >>> The kernel currently allows dying tasks to exceed the memcg limits. > >>> The allocation is expected to be the last one and the occupied memory > >>> will be freed soon. > >>> This is not always true because it can be part of the huge vmalloc > >>> allocation. Allowed once, they will repeat over and over again. > >> > >>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > >>> index 389b5766e74f..67195fcfbddf 100644 > >>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > >>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > >>> @@ -2622,15 +2625,6 @@ static int try_charge_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask, > >>> if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) > >>> goto force; > >>> > >>> - /* > >>> - * Unlike in global OOM situations, memcg is not in a physical > >>> - * memory shortage. Allow dying and OOM-killed tasks to > >>> - * bypass the last charges so that they can exit quickly and > >>> - * free their memory. > >>> - */ > >>> - if (unlikely(should_force_charge())) > >>> - goto force; > >>> - > >> > >> Should we keep current behaviour for (current->flags & PF_EXITING) case perhaps? > > > > Why? > > On this stage task really dies and mostly releases taken resources. > It can allocate though, and this allocation can reach memcg limit due to the activity > of parallel memcg threads. > > Noting bad should happen if we reject this allocation, > because the same thing can happen in non-memcg case too. > However I doubt misuse is possible here and we have possibility to allow graceful shutdown here. > > In other words: we are not obliged to allow such allocations, but we CAN do it because > we hope that it is safe and cannot be misused. This is a lot of hoping that has turned out to be a bad strategy in the existing code. So let's stop hoping and if we are shown that an exit path really benefits from a special treatment then we can add it with a good reasoning rathat than "we hope it's gonna be ok". -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg] memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 12:10:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <5b06a490-55bc-a6a0-6c85-690254f86fad@virtuozzo.com> <8b98d44a-aeb2-5f5f-2545-ac2bd0c7049b@virtuozzo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1631527827; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=AiRkX0WmNs9gJZTMmdh3igwoaOgGldencFjuU/XzQXk=; b=M61ke4OyiDAoRXUd/MfdBGLxA4SX0zHRwS1SjPCxfp063hQwZJ7OSV6psRSojdguit9QyG iHP4GtWWQ++oWv9UpWiB9r2qPGdaulPhnclxsoTsM5mu6uSwe/7KD/SQKy4eyi8aZO04SP yEC2qXYXa3JX5nS6ebbH9gUVva5zRAc= Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Vasily Averin Cc: Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Tetsuo Handa , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On Mon 13-09-21 12:37:56, Vasily Averin wrote: > On 9/13/21 11:39 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 13-09-21 10:51:37, Vasily Averin wrote: > >> On 9/10/21 3:39 PM, Vasily Averin wrote: > >>> The kernel currently allows dying tasks to exceed the memcg limits. > >>> The allocation is expected to be the last one and the occupied memory > >>> will be freed soon. > >>> This is not always true because it can be part of the huge vmalloc > >>> allocation. Allowed once, they will repeat over and over again. > >> > >>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > >>> index 389b5766e74f..67195fcfbddf 100644 > >>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > >>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > >>> @@ -2622,15 +2625,6 @@ static int try_charge_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask, > >>> if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) > >>> goto force; > >>> > >>> - /* > >>> - * Unlike in global OOM situations, memcg is not in a physical > >>> - * memory shortage. Allow dying and OOM-killed tasks to > >>> - * bypass the last charges so that they can exit quickly and > >>> - * free their memory. > >>> - */ > >>> - if (unlikely(should_force_charge())) > >>> - goto force; > >>> - > >> > >> Should we keep current behaviour for (current->flags & PF_EXITING) case perhaps? > > > > Why? > > On this stage task really dies and mostly releases taken resources. > It can allocate though, and this allocation can reach memcg limit due to the activity > of parallel memcg threads. > > Noting bad should happen if we reject this allocation, > because the same thing can happen in non-memcg case too. > However I doubt misuse is possible here and we have possibility to allow graceful shutdown here. > > In other words: we are not obliged to allow such allocations, but we CAN do it because > we hope that it is safe and cannot be misused. This is a lot of hoping that has turned out to be a bad strategy in the existing code. So let's stop hoping and if we are shown that an exit path really benefits from a special treatment then we can add it with a good reasoning rathat than "we hope it's gonna be ok". -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs