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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9AB0C433EF for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:52:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A6660E97 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:52:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 42A6660E97 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=virtuozzo.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D7672900003; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 14:52:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D262C900002; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 14:52:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C152B900003; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 14:52:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0204.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.204]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF03B900002 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 14:52:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin22.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4566939B86 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:52:44 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78710454648.22.6936D4B Received: from relay.sw.ru (relay.sw.ru [185.231.240.75]) by imf27.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7892270000B7 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:52:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=virtuozzo.com; s=relay; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: Subject; bh=FPgXvNFflId9yCiSM6OEGXB6bm9D5jdYlM4GUOjXptc=; b=v/v1+2RL7th4TFOnM fhrDxDe2acIKqtpc/j7V0VI1fVrBkbj21s8dd4LheDZScQgLdKmtYflcsRXLsjWd3tzBQ1U9m2TeO eV2Mmz3edrVXgCbJNvm61m/GG3jhpXKbRcQ8HtGkJsUa8m4paFL9LstT16cvS9/g0lYMfLTwK/bBo =; Received: from [172.29.1.17] by relay.sw.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mcXkS-006OdK-EG; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 21:52:36 +0300 Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg 0/1] false global OOM triggered by memcg-limited task To: Shakeel Butt , Michal Hocko Cc: Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , Uladzislau Rezki , Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman , Cgroups , Linux MM , LKML , kernel@openvz.org References: <9d10df01-0127-fb40-81c3-cc53c9733c3e@virtuozzo.com> <6b751abe-aa52-d1d8-2631-ec471975cc3a@virtuozzo.com> <27dc0c49-a0d6-875b-49c6-0ef5c0cc3ac8@virtuozzo.com> From: Vasily Averin Message-ID: <153f7aa6-39ef-f064-8745-a9489e088239@virtuozzo.com> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 21:52:14 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7892270000B7 X-Stat-Signature: muw8k83ker58dnrgjew7n69as5hg19ye Authentication-Results: imf27.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=virtuozzo.com header.s=relay header.b="v/v1+2RL"; spf=pass (imf27.hostedemail.com: domain of vvs@virtuozzo.com designates 185.231.240.75 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=vvs@virtuozzo.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=virtuozzo.com X-HE-Tag: 1634583162-565384 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 18.10.2021 18:07, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 5:27 AM Michal Hocko wrote: >> >> [restore the cc list] >> >> On Mon 18-10-21 15:14:26, Vasily Averin wrote: >>> On 18.10.2021 14:53, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>> On Mon 18-10-21 13:05:35, Vasily Averin wrote: >>>>> On 18.10.2021 12:04, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>> Here we call try_charge_memcg() that return success and approve the allocation, >>>>> however then we hit into kmem limit and fail the allocation. >>>> >>>> Just to make sure I understand this would be for the v1 kmem explicit >>>> limit, correct? >>> >>> yes, I mean this limit. >> >> OK, thanks for the clarification. This is a known problem. Have a look >> at I think we consider that one to 0158115f702b ("memcg, kmem: deprecate >> kmem.limit_in_bytes"). We are reporting the deprecated and to-be removed >> status since 2019 without any actual report sugested by the kernel >> message. Maybe we should try and remove it and see whether that prompts >> some pushback. >> > > Yes, I think now should be the right time to take the next step for > deprecation of kmem limits: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20201118175726.2453120-1-shakeelb@google.com/ Are you going to push it to stable kernels too? Thank you, Vasily Averin