From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@llwyncelyn.cymru>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "vmalloc: back off when the current task is killed"
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 19:36:17 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55d8bf19-3f29-6264-f954-8749ea234efd@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171005075704.enxdgjteoe4vgbag@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2017/10/05 16:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 04-10-17 19:18:21, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:32:45PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> [...]
>>> You don't think they should be backported into -stables?
>>
>> Good point. For this one, it makes sense to CC stable, for 4.11 and
>> up. The second patch is more of a fortification against potential
>> future issues, and probably shouldn't go into stable.
>
> I am not against. It is true that the memory reserves depletion fix was
> theoretical because I haven't seen any real life bug. I would argue that
> the more robust allocation failure behavior is a stable candidate as
> well, though, because the allocation can fail regardless of the vmalloc
> revert. It is less likely but still possible.
>
I don't want this patch backported. If you want to backport,
"s/fatal_signal_pending/tsk_is_oom_victim/" is the safer way.
On 2017/10/04 17:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Now that we have cd04ae1e2dc8 ("mm, oom: do not rely on TIF_MEMDIE for
> memory reserves access") the risk of the memory depletion is much
> smaller so reverting the above commit should be acceptable.
Are you aware that stable kernels do not have cd04ae1e2dc8 ?
We added fatal_signal_pending() check inside read()/write() loop
because one read()/write() request could consume 2GB of kernel memory.
What if there is a kernel module which uses vmalloc(1GB) from some
ioctl() for legitimate reason? You are going to allow such vmalloc()
calls to deplete memory reserves completely.
On 2017/10/05 8:21, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Generally, we should leave it to the page allocator to handle memory
> reserves, not annotate random alloc_page() callsites.
I disagree. Interrupting the loop as soon as possible is preferable.
Since we don't have __GFP_KILLABLE, we had to do fatal_signal_pending()
check inside read()/write() loop. Since vmalloc() resembles read()/write()
in a sense that it can consume GB of memory, it is pointless to expect
the caller of vmalloc() to check tsk_is_oom_victim().
Again, checking tsk_is_oom_victim() inside vmalloc() loop is the better.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-05 10:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-03 22:55 tty crash due to auto-failing vmalloc Johannes Weiner
2017-10-03 23:51 ` Alan Cox
2017-10-04 8:33 ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-04 18:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-10-04 18:59 ` [PATCH 1/2] Revert "vmalloc: back off when the current task is killed" Johannes Weiner
2017-10-04 20:49 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-04 21:00 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-10-04 21:42 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-04 23:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-10-04 22:32 ` Andrew Morton
2017-10-04 23:18 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-10-05 7:57 ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-05 10:36 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2017-10-05 10:49 ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-07 2:21 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-07 2:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-10-07 4:05 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-07 7:59 ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-07 9:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-05 6:49 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-10-05 7:54 ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-04 18:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] tty: fall back to N_NULL if switching to N_TTY fails during hangup Johannes Weiner
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=55d8bf19-3f29-6264-f954-8749ea234efd@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@llwyncelyn.cymru \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
/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).