* [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-27 14:57 ` [PATCH v3] " Tetsuo Handa
@ 2019-01-27 14:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27 16:58 ` Michal Hocko
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Tetsuo Handa @ 2019-01-27 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Hocko
Cc: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Andrew Morton, Tejun Heo, cgroups,
Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Roman Gushchin, Johannes Weiner,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
On 2019/01/27 20:40, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sun 27-01-19 19:56:06, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> On 2019/01/27 17:37, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> Thanks for the analysis and the patch. This should work, I believe but
>>> I am not really thrilled to overload the meaning of the MMF_UNSTABLE.
>>> The flag is meant to signal accessing address space is not stable and it
>>> is not aimed to synchronize oom reaper with the oom path.
>>>
>>> Can we make use mark_oom_victim directly? I didn't get to think that
>>> through right now so I might be missing something but this should
>>> prevent repeating queueing as well.
>>
>> Yes, TIF_MEMDIE would work. But you are planning to remove TIF_MEMDIE. Also,
>> TIF_MEMDIE can't avoid enqueuing many threads sharing mm_struct to the OOM
>> reaper. There is no need to enqueue many threads sharing mm_struct because
>> the OOM reaper acts on mm_struct rather than task_struct. Thus, enqueuing
>> based on per mm_struct flag sounds better, but MMF_OOM_VICTIM cannot be
>> set from wake_oom_reaper(victim) because victim's mm might be already inside
>> exit_mmap() when wake_oom_reaper(victim) is called after task_unlock(victim).
>>
>> We could reintroduce MMF_OOM_KILLED in commit 855b018325737f76
>> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task")
>> if you don't like overloading the meaning of the MMF_UNSTABLE. But since
>> MMF_UNSTABLE is available in Linux 4.9+ kernels (which covers all LTS stable
>> versions with the OOM reaper support), we can temporarily use MMF_UNSTABLE
>> for ease of backporting.
>
> I agree that a per-mm state is more optimal but I would rather fix the
> issue in a clear way first and only then think about an optimization on
> top. Queueing based on mark_oom_victim (whatever that uses to guarantee
> the victim is marked atomically and only once) makes sense from the
> conceptual point of view and it makes a lot of sense to start from
> there. MMF_UNSTABLE has a completely different purpose. So unless you
> see a correctness issue with that then I would rather go that way.
>
Then, adding a per mm_struct flag is better. I don't see the difference
between reusing MMF_UNSTABLE as a flag for whether wake_oom_reaper() for
that victim's memory was already called (what you think as an overload)
and reusing TIF_MEMDIE as a flag for whether wake_oom_reaper() for that
victim thread can be called (what I think as an overload). We want to
remove TIF_MEMDIE, and we can actually remove TIF_MEMDIE if you stop
whack-a-mole "can you observe it in real workload/program?" game.
I don't see a correctness issue with TIF_MEMDIE but I don't want to go
TIF_MEMDIE way.
From 9c9e935fc038342c48461aabca666f1b544e32b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:51:37 +0900
Subject: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
due to a refcount leak.
This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
request.
Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Reported-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
Tested-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
Fixes: af8e15cc85a25315 ("oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue task if it is on the oom_reaper_list head")
---
include/linux/sched/coredump.h | 1 +
mm/oom_kill.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
index ec912d0..ecdc654 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static inline int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct *mm)
#define MMF_HUGE_ZERO_PAGE 23 /* mm has ever used the global huge zero page */
#define MMF_DISABLE_THP 24 /* disable THP for all VMAs */
#define MMF_OOM_VICTIM 25 /* mm is the oom victim */
+#define MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED 26 /* mm was queued for oom_reaper */
#define MMF_DISABLE_THP_MASK (1 << MMF_DISABLE_THP)
#define MMF_INIT_MASK (MMF_DUMPABLE_MASK | MMF_DUMP_FILTER_MASK |\
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index f0e8cd9..059e617 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -647,8 +647,8 @@ static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
static void wake_oom_reaper(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
- /* tsk is already queued? */
- if (tsk == oom_reaper_list || tsk->oom_reaper_list)
+ /* mm is already queued? */
+ if (test_and_set_bit(MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED, &tsk->signal->oom_mm->flags))
return;
get_task_struct(tsk);
--
1.8.3.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-27 14:57 ` [PATCH v3] " Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27 14:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
@ 2019-01-27 16:58 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-27 23:00 ` Roman Gushchin
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2019-01-27 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tetsuo Handa
Cc: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Andrew Morton, Tejun Heo, cgroups,
Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Roman Gushchin, Johannes Weiner,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
On Sun 27-01-19 23:57:38, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[...]
> >From 9c9e935fc038342c48461aabca666f1b544e32b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:51:37 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
>
> Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
> strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
> the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
> is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
> which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
> due to a refcount leak.
>
> This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> request.
>
> Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
> As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
> multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Reported-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
> Tested-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
> Fixes: af8e15cc85a25315 ("oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue task if it is on the oom_reaper_list head")
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> ---
> include/linux/sched/coredump.h | 1 +
> mm/oom_kill.c | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> index ec912d0..ecdc654 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static inline int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct *mm)
> #define MMF_HUGE_ZERO_PAGE 23 /* mm has ever used the global huge zero page */
> #define MMF_DISABLE_THP 24 /* disable THP for all VMAs */
> #define MMF_OOM_VICTIM 25 /* mm is the oom victim */
> +#define MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED 26 /* mm was queued for oom_reaper */
> #define MMF_DISABLE_THP_MASK (1 << MMF_DISABLE_THP)
>
> #define MMF_INIT_MASK (MMF_DUMPABLE_MASK | MMF_DUMP_FILTER_MASK |\
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index f0e8cd9..059e617 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -647,8 +647,8 @@ static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
>
> static void wake_oom_reaper(struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> - /* tsk is already queued? */
> - if (tsk == oom_reaper_list || tsk->oom_reaper_list)
> + /* mm is already queued? */
> + if (test_and_set_bit(MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED, &tsk->signal->oom_mm->flags))
> return;
>
> get_task_struct(tsk);
> --
> 1.8.3.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-27 14:57 ` [PATCH v3] " Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27 14:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27 16:58 ` Michal Hocko
@ 2019-01-27 23:00 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-01-28 18:15 ` Andrew Morton
2019-01-28 21:53 ` Johannes Weiner
4 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2019-01-27 23:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tetsuo Handa
Cc: Michal Hocko, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Andrew Morton,
Tejun Heo, cgroups, Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Johannes Weiner,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 11:57:38PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/01/27 20:40, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Sun 27-01-19 19:56:06, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >> On 2019/01/27 17:37, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the analysis and the patch. This should work, I believe but
> >>> I am not really thrilled to overload the meaning of the MMF_UNSTABLE.
> >>> The flag is meant to signal accessing address space is not stable and it
> >>> is not aimed to synchronize oom reaper with the oom path.
> >>>
> >>> Can we make use mark_oom_victim directly? I didn't get to think that
> >>> through right now so I might be missing something but this should
> >>> prevent repeating queueing as well.
> >>
> >> Yes, TIF_MEMDIE would work. But you are planning to remove TIF_MEMDIE. Also,
> >> TIF_MEMDIE can't avoid enqueuing many threads sharing mm_struct to the OOM
> >> reaper. There is no need to enqueue many threads sharing mm_struct because
> >> the OOM reaper acts on mm_struct rather than task_struct. Thus, enqueuing
> >> based on per mm_struct flag sounds better, but MMF_OOM_VICTIM cannot be
> >> set from wake_oom_reaper(victim) because victim's mm might be already inside
> >> exit_mmap() when wake_oom_reaper(victim) is called after task_unlock(victim).
> >>
> >> We could reintroduce MMF_OOM_KILLED in commit 855b018325737f76
> >> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task")
> >> if you don't like overloading the meaning of the MMF_UNSTABLE. But since
> >> MMF_UNSTABLE is available in Linux 4.9+ kernels (which covers all LTS stable
> >> versions with the OOM reaper support), we can temporarily use MMF_UNSTABLE
> >> for ease of backporting.
> >
> > I agree that a per-mm state is more optimal but I would rather fix the
> > issue in a clear way first and only then think about an optimization on
> > top. Queueing based on mark_oom_victim (whatever that uses to guarantee
> > the victim is marked atomically and only once) makes sense from the
> > conceptual point of view and it makes a lot of sense to start from
> > there. MMF_UNSTABLE has a completely different purpose. So unless you
> > see a correctness issue with that then I would rather go that way.
> >
>
> Then, adding a per mm_struct flag is better. I don't see the difference
> between reusing MMF_UNSTABLE as a flag for whether wake_oom_reaper() for
> that victim's memory was already called (what you think as an overload)
> and reusing TIF_MEMDIE as a flag for whether wake_oom_reaper() for that
> victim thread can be called (what I think as an overload). We want to
> remove TIF_MEMDIE, and we can actually remove TIF_MEMDIE if you stop
> whack-a-mole "can you observe it in real workload/program?" game.
> I don't see a correctness issue with TIF_MEMDIE but I don't want to go
> TIF_MEMDIE way.
>
>
>
> From 9c9e935fc038342c48461aabca666f1b544e32b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:51:37 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
>
> Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
> strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
> the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
> is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
> which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
> due to a refcount leak.
>
> This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> request.
>
> Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
> As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
> multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Reported-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
> Tested-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
> Fixes: af8e15cc85a25315 ("oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue task if it is on the oom_reaper_list head")
Thank you, Tetsuo!
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-27 14:57 ` [PATCH v3] " Tetsuo Handa
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2019-01-27 23:00 ` Roman Gushchin
@ 2019-01-28 18:15 ` Andrew Morton
2019-01-28 18:42 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-28 21:53 ` Johannes Weiner
4 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2019-01-28 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tetsuo Handa
Cc: Michal Hocko, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Tejun Heo, cgroups,
Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Roman Gushchin, Johannes Weiner,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:57:38 +0900 Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
> strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
> the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
> is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
> which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
> due to a refcount leak.
>
> This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> request.
>
> Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
> As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
> multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
>
Do we think this is serious enough to warrant a -stable backport?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-28 18:15 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2019-01-28 18:42 ` Michal Hocko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2019-01-28 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Tetsuo Handa, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Tejun Heo, cgroups,
Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Roman Gushchin, Johannes Weiner,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
On Mon 28-01-19 10:15:13, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:57:38 +0900 Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
>
> > Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
> > strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
> > the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
> > is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
> > which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
> > due to a refcount leak.
> >
> > This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> > task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> > but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> > calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> > request.
> >
> > Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
> > ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
> > As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
> > multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
> >
>
> Do we think this is serious enough to warrant a -stable backport?
Yes, I would go with stable backport.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-27 14:57 ` [PATCH v3] " Tetsuo Handa
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2019-01-28 18:15 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2019-01-28 21:53 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-01-29 10:34 ` Tetsuo Handa
4 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Weiner @ 2019-01-28 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tetsuo Handa
Cc: Michal Hocko, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Andrew Morton,
Tejun Heo, cgroups, Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Roman Gushchin,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
Hi Tetsuo,
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 11:57:38PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> From 9c9e935fc038342c48461aabca666f1b544e32b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:51:37 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
>
> Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
> strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
> the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
> is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
> which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
> due to a refcount leak.
>
> This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> request.
This changelog seems a little terse compared to how tricky this is.
Can you please include an explanation here *how* this bug is possible?
I.e. the race condition that causes the function te be entered twice
and the existing re-entrance check in there to fail.
> Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
> As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
> multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
2019-01-28 21:53 ` Johannes Weiner
@ 2019-01-29 10:34 ` Tetsuo Handa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Tetsuo Handa @ 2019-01-29 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Weiner
Cc: Michal Hocko, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, Andrew Morton,
Tejun Heo, cgroups, Aleksa Sarai, Jay Kamat, Roman Gushchin,
linux-kernel, Linus Torvalds, linux-mm
Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 11:57:38PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> > task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> > but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> > calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> > request.
>
> This changelog seems a little terse compared to how tricky this is.
>
> Can you please include an explanation here *how* this bug is possible?
> I.e. the race condition that causes the function te be entered twice
> and the existing re-entrance check in there to fail.
OK. Here is an updated patch. Only changelog part has changed.
I hope this will provide enough information to stable kernel maintainers.
----------
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Subject: oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes strange
memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite the number of
tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there is a bug in
wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice which makes
impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg due to a refcount
leak.
This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
T1@P1 |T2@P1 |T3@P1 |OOM reaper
----------+----------+----------+------------
# Processing an OOM victim in a different memcg domain.
try_charge()
mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
mutex_lock(&oom_lock)
try_charge()
mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
mutex_lock(&oom_lock)
try_charge()
mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
mutex_lock(&oom_lock)
out_of_memory()
oom_kill_process(P1)
do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, @P1)
mark_oom_victim(T1@P1)
wake_oom_reaper(T1@P1) # T1@P1 is enqueued.
mutex_unlock(&oom_lock)
out_of_memory()
mark_oom_victim(T2@P1)
wake_oom_reaper(T2@P1) # T2@P1 is enqueued.
mutex_unlock(&oom_lock)
out_of_memory()
mark_oom_victim(T1@P1)
wake_oom_reaper(T1@P1) # T1@P1 is enqueued again due to oom_reaper_list == T2@P1 && T1@P1->oom_reaper_list == NULL.
mutex_unlock(&oom_lock)
# Completed processing an OOM victim in a different memcg domain.
spin_lock(&oom_reaper_lock)
# T1P1 is dequeued.
spin_unlock(&oom_reaper_lock)
but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
request.
Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76 ("oom,
oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task"). As a side
effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing multiple threads
sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
Fixes: af8e15cc85a25315 ("oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue task if it is on the oom_reaper_list head")
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Reported-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
Tested-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Aleksa Sarai <asarai@suse.de>
Cc: Jay Kamat <jgkamat@fb.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
---
include/linux/sched/coredump.h | 1 +
mm/oom_kill.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
index ec912d0..ecdc654 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static inline int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct *mm)
#define MMF_HUGE_ZERO_PAGE 23 /* mm has ever used the global huge zero page */
#define MMF_DISABLE_THP 24 /* disable THP for all VMAs */
#define MMF_OOM_VICTIM 25 /* mm is the oom victim */
+#define MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED 26 /* mm was queued for oom_reaper */
#define MMF_DISABLE_THP_MASK (1 << MMF_DISABLE_THP)
#define MMF_INIT_MASK (MMF_DUMPABLE_MASK | MMF_DUMP_FILTER_MASK |\
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index f0e8cd9..059e617 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -647,8 +647,8 @@ static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
static void wake_oom_reaper(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
- /* tsk is already queued? */
- if (tsk == oom_reaper_list || tsk->oom_reaper_list)
+ /* mm is already queued? */
+ if (test_and_set_bit(MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED, &tsk->signal->oom_mm->flags))
return;
get_task_struct(tsk);
--
1.8.3.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread