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 725FDC433EF for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:09:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D091861260 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:09:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org D091861260 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 5856D6B0072; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:09:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 5342C6B0078; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:09:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 423E1900002; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:09:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0009.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.9]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 345EC6B0072 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:09:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin27.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D2128DCB for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:09:48 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78714126456.27.9AD36B2 Received: from relay.sw.ru (relay.sw.ru [185.231.240.75]) by imf07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D2C10000A6 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:09:51 +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=Yqr1YShrQcBCidEtPOA9sMOR94IFy+dgIlzbwZ5QLM0=; b=hmWnZiptUY0gW9Ixx F3iAf57vhvo+PH2jLrgp3MwAYAFI8HIJaGCey++5FcHdvnDNHuBaz5vYYRiGRkSJvnoKV5HLs30ES ap16a4SDbcsjwIAEnIJvKsavVyn44eyjZqFjeB/JlipTbu6UfhyqHrlTBG0a1RypKzEgx5lsCjKXI =; Received: from [172.29.1.17] by relay.sw.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mcuUX-006Vw6-6X; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 22:09:41 +0300 Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg 0/1] false global OOM triggered by memcg-limited task To: Michal Hocko Cc: Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , Uladzislau Rezki , Vlastimil Babka , Shakeel Butt , Mel Gorman , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@openvz.org References: <9d10df01-0127-fb40-81c3-cc53c9733c3e@virtuozzo.com> <6b751abe-aa52-d1d8-2631-ec471975cc3a@virtuozzo.com> <339ae4b5-6efd-8fc2-33f1-2eb3aee71cb2@virtuozzo.com> <687bf489-f7a7-5604-25c5-0c1a09e0905b@virtuozzo.com> <6c422150-593f-f601-8f91-914c6c5e82f4@virtuozzo.com> From: Vasily Averin Message-ID: <3c76e2d7-e545-ef34-b2c3-a5f63b1eff51@virtuozzo.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 22:09:19 +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-Stat-Signature: x33c4c7u1xsdhx3eqoedg96nedtxz8s5 Authentication-Results: imf07.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=virtuozzo.com header.s=relay header.b=hmWnZipt; spf=pass (imf07.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-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 94D2C10000A6 X-HE-Tag: 1634670591-171587 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 19.10.2021 17:13, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 19-10-21 16:26:50, Vasily Averin wrote: >> On 19.10.2021 15:04, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> On Tue 19-10-21 13:54:42, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>> On Tue 19-10-21 13:30:06, Vasily Averin wrote: >>>>> On 19.10.2021 11:49, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>>> On Tue 19-10-21 09:30:18, Vasily Averin wrote: >>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> With my patch ("memcg: prohibit unconditional exceeding the limit of dying tasks") try_charge_memcg() can fail: >>>>>>> a) due to fatal signal >>>>>>> b) when mem_cgroup_oom -> mem_cgroup_out_of_memory -> out_of_memory() returns false (when select_bad_process() found nothing) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To handle a) we can follow to your suggestion and skip excution of out_of_memory() in pagefault_out_of memory() >>>>>>> To handle b) we can go to retry: if mem_cgroup_oom() return OOM_FAILED. >>>>> >>>>>> How is b) possible without current being killed? Do we allow remote >>>>>> charging? >>>>> >>>>> out_of_memory for memcg_oom >>>>> select_bad_process >>>>> mem_cgroup_scan_tasks >>>>> oom_evaluate_task >>>>> oom_badness >>>>> >>>>> /* >>>>> * Do not even consider tasks which are explicitly marked oom >>>>> * unkillable or have been already oom reaped or the are in >>>>> * the middle of vfork >>>>> */ >>>>> adj = (long)p->signal->oom_score_adj; >>>>> if (adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN || >>>>> test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &p->mm->flags) || >>>>> in_vfork(p)) { >>>>> task_unlock(p); >>>>> return LONG_MIN; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> This time we handle userspace page fault, so we cannot be kenrel thread, >>>>> and cannot be in_vfork(). >>>>> However task can be marked as oom unkillable, >>>>> i.e. have p->signal->oom_score_adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN >>>> >>>> You are right. I am not sure there is a way out of this though. The task >>>> can only retry for ever in this case. There is nothing actionable here. >>>> We cannot kill the task and there is no other way to release the memory. >>> >>> Btw. don't we force the charge in that case? >> >> We should force charge for allocation from inside page fault handler, >> to prevent endless cycle in retried page faults. >> However we should not do it for allocations from task context, >> to prevent memcg-limited vmalloc-eaters from to consume all host memory. > > I don't see a big difference between those two. Because the #PF could > result into the very same situation depleting all the memory by > overcharging. A different behavior just leads to a confusion and > unexpected behavior. E.g. in the past we only triggered memcg OOM killer > from the #PF path and failed the charge otherwise. That is something > different but it shows problems we haven't anticipated and had user > visible problems. See 29ef680ae7c2 ("memcg, oom: move out_of_memory back > to the charge path"). In this case I think we should fail this allocation. It's better do not allow overcharge, neither in #PF not in regular allocations. However this failure will trigger false global OOM in pagefault_out_of_memory(), and we need to find some way to prevent it. Thank you, Vasily Averin