From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/4] memcg: refactor mem_cgroup_oom
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 22:49:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220211064917.2028469-2-shakeelb@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220211064917.2028469-1-shakeelb@google.com>
The function mem_cgroup_oom returns enum which has four possible values
but the caller does not care about such values and only cares if the
return value is OOM_SUCCESS or not. So, remove the enum altogether and
make mem_cgroup_oom returns a simple bool.
Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
---
Changes since v1:
- Added comment for mem_cgroup_oom as suggested by Roman
mm/memcontrol.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++---------------------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index a0e9d9f12cf5..f12e489ba9b8 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1795,20 +1795,16 @@ static void memcg_oom_recover(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
__wake_up(&memcg_oom_waitq, TASK_NORMAL, 0, memcg);
}
-enum oom_status {
- OOM_SUCCESS,
- OOM_FAILED,
- OOM_ASYNC,
- OOM_SKIPPED
-};
-
-static enum oom_status mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int order)
+/*
+ * Returns true if successfully killed one or more processes. Though in some
+ * corner cases it can return true even without killing any process.
+ */
+static bool mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int order)
{
- enum oom_status ret;
- bool locked;
+ bool locked, ret;
if (order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
- return OOM_SKIPPED;
+ return false;
memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_OOM);
@@ -1831,14 +1827,13 @@ static enum oom_status mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int
* victim and then we have to bail out from the charge path.
*/
if (memcg->oom_kill_disable) {
- if (!current->in_user_fault)
- return OOM_SKIPPED;
- css_get(&memcg->css);
- current->memcg_in_oom = memcg;
- current->memcg_oom_gfp_mask = mask;
- current->memcg_oom_order = order;
-
- return OOM_ASYNC;
+ if (current->in_user_fault) {
+ css_get(&memcg->css);
+ current->memcg_in_oom = memcg;
+ current->memcg_oom_gfp_mask = mask;
+ current->memcg_oom_order = order;
+ }
+ return false;
}
mem_cgroup_mark_under_oom(memcg);
@@ -1849,10 +1844,7 @@ static enum oom_status mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int
mem_cgroup_oom_notify(memcg);
mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(memcg);
- if (mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, mask, order))
- ret = OOM_SUCCESS;
- else
- ret = OOM_FAILED;
+ ret = mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, mask, order);
if (locked)
mem_cgroup_oom_unlock(memcg);
@@ -2545,7 +2537,6 @@ static int try_charge_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
int nr_retries = MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
struct mem_cgroup *mem_over_limit;
struct page_counter *counter;
- enum oom_status oom_status;
unsigned long nr_reclaimed;
bool passed_oom = false;
bool may_swap = true;
@@ -2648,9 +2639,8 @@ static int try_charge_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
* a forward progress or bypass the charge if the oom killer
* couldn't make any progress.
*/
- oom_status = mem_cgroup_oom(mem_over_limit, gfp_mask,
- get_order(nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE));
- if (oom_status == OOM_SUCCESS) {
+ if (mem_cgroup_oom(mem_over_limit, gfp_mask,
+ get_order(nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE))) {
passed_oom = true;
nr_retries = MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
goto retry;
--
2.35.1.265.g69c8d7142f-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-11 6:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-11 6:49 [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: robust enforcement of memory.high Shakeel Butt
2022-02-11 6:49 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2022-02-11 6:49 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] memcg: unify force charging conditions Shakeel Butt
2022-02-11 6:49 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] selftests: memcg: test high limit for single entry allocation Shakeel Butt
2022-02-15 23:28 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-02-11 6:49 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] memcg: synchronously enforce memory.high for large overcharges Shakeel Butt
2022-02-11 12:13 ` Chris Down
2022-02-11 20:36 ` Shakeel Butt
2022-02-16 13:12 ` Chris Down
2022-02-15 18:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2022-02-15 23:27 ` Roman Gushchin
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=20220211064917.2028469-2-shakeelb@google.com \
--to=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).