From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM tasks
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 19:23:35 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <38568dbe-f45b-8c55-84e4-d4dcbdbef545@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8a71ecd8-e7bc-25de-184f-dfda511ee0d1@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
On 2018/12/07 21:43, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> No response for one month. When can we get to an RCU stall problem syzbot reported?
Why not to apply this patch and then think how to address
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/201810100012.w9A0Cjtn047782@www262.sakura.ne.jp/ ?
>From 0fb58415770a83d6c40d471e1840f8bc4a35ca83 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 19:15:51 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] memcg: killed threads should not invoke memcg OOM killer
It is possible that a single process group memcg easily swamps the log
with no-eligible OOM victim messages after current thread was OOM-killed,
due to race between the memcg charge and the OOM reaper [1].
Thread-1 Thread-2 OOM reaper
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()
select_bad_process()
oom_kill_process(current)
wake_oom_reaper()
oom_reap_task()
# sets MMF_OOM_SKIP
mutex_unlock(oom_lock)
out_of_memory()
select_bad_process() # no task
mutex_unlock(oom_lock)
We don't need to invoke the memcg OOM killer if current thread was killed
when waiting for oom_lock, for mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize(true) and
memory_max_write() can bail out upon SIGKILL, and try_charge() allows
already killed/exiting threads to make forward progress.
Michal has a plan to use tsk_is_oom_victim() by calling mark_oom_victim()
on all thread groups sharing victim's mm. But fatal_signal_pending() in
this patch helps regardless of Michal's plan because it will avoid
needlessly calling out_of_memory() when current thread is already
terminating (e.g. got SIGINT after passing fatal_signal_pending() check
in try_charge() and mutex_lock_killable() did not block).
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/ea637f9a-5dd0-f927-d26d-d0b4fd8ccb6f@i-love.sakura.ne.jp
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 9 +++++++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index b860dd4f7..b0d3bf3 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1389,8 +1389,13 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
};
bool ret;
- mutex_lock(&oom_lock);
- ret = out_of_memory(&oc);
+ if (mutex_lock_killable(&oom_lock))
+ return true;
+ /*
+ * A few threads which were not waiting at mutex_lock_killable() can
+ * fail to bail out. Therefore, check again after holding oom_lock.
+ */
+ ret = fatal_signal_pending(current) || out_of_memory(&oc);
mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
return ret;
}
--
1.8.3.1
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-12 10:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-22 7:13 [RFC PATCH 0/2] oom, memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 7:13 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: marks all killed tasks as oom victims Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 7:58 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-22 8:48 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 9:42 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-22 10:43 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 10:56 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-22 11:12 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 11:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 " Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 7:13 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM tasks Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 11:45 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-22 12:03 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 13:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-22 13:43 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 15:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-23 1:01 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-23 11:42 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-23 12:10 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-23 12:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-10-23 12:48 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-26 14:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2018-10-26 19:25 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-26 19:33 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-27 1:10 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-11-06 9:44 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-11-06 12:42 ` Michal Hocko
2018-11-07 9:45 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-11-07 10:08 ` Michal Hocko
2018-12-07 12:43 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-12-12 10:23 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
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=38568dbe-f45b-8c55-84e4-d4dcbdbef545@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--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 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).