* [PATCH 0/2] memcg oom: don't try to kill a process if there is no process
@ 2020-05-02 14:34 Yafang Shao
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() Yafang Shao
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated Yafang Shao
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yafang Shao @ 2020-05-02 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm; +Cc: shakeelb, hannes, mhocko, guro, gthelen, linux-mm, Yafang Shao
Recently Shakeel reported a issue which also confused me serveral months
earlier that it still try to kill a process even if there is no process.
If a memcg is not populated, it is useless to try to kill a process.
mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() is renamed to mem_cgroup_oom_kill() for better
understanding.
Yafang Shao (2):
mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated
mm/memcontrol.c | 14 +++++++++-----
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--
2.18.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
2020-05-02 14:34 [PATCH 0/2] memcg oom: don't try to kill a process if there is no process Yafang Shao
@ 2020-05-02 14:34 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-03 22:20 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated Yafang Shao
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yafang Shao @ 2020-05-02 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm; +Cc: shakeelb, hannes, mhocko, guro, gthelen, linux-mm, Yafang Shao
Rename mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() to mem_cgroup_oom_kill() to indicate
that this function is used to try to kill a process.
With this change it will cooperate better with the oom events.
function memcg event
mem_cgroup_oom() oom
mem_cgroup_oom_kill() oom_kill
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 5beea03dd58a..985edce98491 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1570,7 +1570,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_size(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
return page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
}
-static bool mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
+static bool mem_cgroup_oom_kill(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
int order)
{
struct oom_control oc = {
@@ -1799,7 +1799,7 @@ static enum oom_status mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int
* relying on the oom victim to make a forward progress and we can
* invoke the oom killer here.
*
- * Please note that mem_cgroup_out_of_memory might fail to find a
+ * Please note that mem_cgroup_oom_kill might fail to find a
* victim and then we have to bail out from the charge path.
*/
if (memcg->oom_kill_disable) {
@@ -1821,7 +1821,7 @@ 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))
+ if (mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, mask, order))
ret = OOM_SUCCESS;
else
ret = OOM_FAILED;
@@ -1879,7 +1879,7 @@ bool mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize(bool handle)
if (locked && !memcg->oom_kill_disable) {
mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(memcg);
finish_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &owait.wait);
- mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, current->memcg_oom_gfp_mask,
+ mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, current->memcg_oom_gfp_mask,
current->memcg_oom_order);
} else {
schedule();
@@ -6102,7 +6102,7 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
}
memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_OOM);
- if (!mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
+ if (!mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
break;
}
--
2.18.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated
2020-05-02 14:34 [PATCH 0/2] memcg oom: don't try to kill a process if there is no process Yafang Shao
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() Yafang Shao
@ 2020-05-02 14:34 ` Yafang Shao
2020-05-03 22:59 ` Shakeel Butt
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yafang Shao @ 2020-05-02 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm; +Cc: shakeelb, hannes, mhocko, guro, gthelen, linux-mm, Yafang Shao
Recently Shakeel reported a issue which also confused me serveral months
earlier. Bellow is his report -
Lowering memory.max can trigger an oom-kill if the reclaim does not
succeed. However if oom-killer does not find a process for killing, it
dumps a lot of warnings.
Deleting a memcg does not reclaim memory from it and the memory can
linger till there is a memory pressure. One normal way to proactively
reclaim such memory is to set memory.max to 0 just before deleting the
memcg. However if some of the memcg's memory is pinned by others, this
operation can trigger an oom-kill without any process and thus can log a
lot un-needed warnings. So, ignore all such warnings from memory.max.
[shakeelb@google.com: commit log above]
A better way to avoid this issue is to avoid trying to kill a process if
memcg is not populated.
Note that OOM is different with OOM kill. OOM is a status that the
system or memcg is out of memory, while OOM kill is a result that a
process inside this memcg is killed when this memcg is in OOM status.
That is the same reason why there're both MEMCG_OOM event and
MEMCG_OOM_KILL event. If we have already known that there's nothing to
kill, i.e. the memcg is not populated, then we don't need to have a try.
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 985edce98491..29afe3df9d98 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -6102,6 +6102,10 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
}
memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_OOM);
+
+ if (!cgroup_is_populated(memcg->css.cgroup))
+ break;
+
if (!mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
break;
}
--
2.18.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() Yafang Shao
@ 2020-05-03 22:20 ` Shakeel Butt
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Shakeel Butt @ 2020-05-03 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yafang Shao
Cc: Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Greg Thelen, Linux MM
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:35 AM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Rename mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() to mem_cgroup_oom_kill() to indicate
> that this function is used to try to kill a process.
> With this change it will cooperate better with the oom events.
> function memcg event
> mem_cgroup_oom() oom
> mem_cgroup_oom_kill() oom_kill
>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 5beea03dd58a..985edce98491 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1570,7 +1570,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_size(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> return page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
> }
>
> -static bool mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> +static bool mem_cgroup_oom_kill(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> int order)
> {
> struct oom_control oc = {
> @@ -1799,7 +1799,7 @@ static enum oom_status mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int
> * relying on the oom victim to make a forward progress and we can
> * invoke the oom killer here.
> *
> - * Please note that mem_cgroup_out_of_memory might fail to find a
> + * Please note that mem_cgroup_oom_kill might fail to find a
> * victim and then we have to bail out from the charge path.
> */
> if (memcg->oom_kill_disable) {
> @@ -1821,7 +1821,7 @@ 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))
> + if (mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, mask, order))
> ret = OOM_SUCCESS;
> else
> ret = OOM_FAILED;
> @@ -1879,7 +1879,7 @@ bool mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize(bool handle)
> if (locked && !memcg->oom_kill_disable) {
> mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(memcg);
> finish_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &owait.wait);
> - mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, current->memcg_oom_gfp_mask,
> + mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, current->memcg_oom_gfp_mask,
> current->memcg_oom_order);
> } else {
> schedule();
> @@ -6102,7 +6102,7 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
> }
>
> memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_OOM);
> - if (!mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
> + if (!mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
> break;
> }
>
> --
> 2.18.2
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated Yafang Shao
@ 2020-05-03 22:59 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 3:03 ` Yafang Shao
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Shakeel Butt @ 2020-05-03 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yafang Shao
Cc: Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Greg Thelen, Linux MM
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:35 AM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Recently Shakeel reported a issue which also confused me serveral months
> earlier. Bellow is his report -
>
> Lowering memory.max can trigger an oom-kill if the reclaim does not
> succeed. However if oom-killer does not find a process for killing, it
> dumps a lot of warnings.
>
> Deleting a memcg does not reclaim memory from it and the memory can
> linger till there is a memory pressure. One normal way to proactively
> reclaim such memory is to set memory.max to 0 just before deleting the
> memcg. However if some of the memcg's memory is pinned by others, this
> operation can trigger an oom-kill without any process and thus can log a
> lot un-needed warnings. So, ignore all such warnings from memory.max.
lot *of* un-needed
>
> [shakeelb@google.com: commit log above]
>
> A better way to avoid this issue is to avoid trying to kill a process if
> memcg is not populated.
> Note that OOM is different with OOM kill.
different *from*
> OOM is a status that the
> system or memcg is out of memory, while OOM kill is a result that a
> process inside this memcg is killed when this memcg is in OOM status.
> That is the same reason why there're both MEMCG_OOM event and
> MEMCG_OOM_KILL event. If we have already known that there's nothing to
> kill, i.e. the memcg is not populated, then we don't need to have a try.
need to try
I think adding the discussion of memory.high is also useful in the
commit message. Basically why setting memory.max to 0 is better than
setting memory.high to 0 before deletion. The reason is remote
charging.
>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 985edce98491..29afe3df9d98 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -6102,6 +6102,10 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
> }
>
> memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_OOM);
> +
> + if (!cgroup_is_populated(memcg->css.cgroup))
> + break;
> +
> if (!mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
> break;
> }
> --
> 2.18.2
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated
2020-05-03 22:59 ` Shakeel Butt
@ 2020-05-04 3:03 ` Yafang Shao
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yafang Shao @ 2020-05-04 3:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shakeel Butt
Cc: Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Greg Thelen, Linux MM
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:00 AM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:35 AM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Recently Shakeel reported a issue which also confused me serveral months
> > earlier. Bellow is his report -
> >
> > Lowering memory.max can trigger an oom-kill if the reclaim does not
> > succeed. However if oom-killer does not find a process for killing, it
> > dumps a lot of warnings.
> >
> > Deleting a memcg does not reclaim memory from it and the memory can
> > linger till there is a memory pressure. One normal way to proactively
> > reclaim such memory is to set memory.max to 0 just before deleting the
> > memcg. However if some of the memcg's memory is pinned by others, this
> > operation can trigger an oom-kill without any process and thus can log a
> > lot un-needed warnings. So, ignore all such warnings from memory.max.
>
> lot *of* un-needed
>
Thanks.
> >
> > [shakeelb@google.com: commit log above]
> >
> > A better way to avoid this issue is to avoid trying to kill a process if
> > memcg is not populated.
> > Note that OOM is different with OOM kill.
>
> different *from*
>
Thanks
> > OOM is a status that the
> > system or memcg is out of memory, while OOM kill is a result that a
> > process inside this memcg is killed when this memcg is in OOM status.
> > That is the same reason why there're both MEMCG_OOM event and
> > MEMCG_OOM_KILL event. If we have already known that there's nothing to
> > kill, i.e. the memcg is not populated, then we don't need to have a try.
>
> need to try
>
Thanks
> I think adding the discussion of memory.high is also useful in the
> commit message. Basically why setting memory.max to 0 is better than
> setting memory.high to 0 before deletion. The reason is remote
> charging.
>
Sure, will add it.
> >
> > Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> > Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> > Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
>
> > ---
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index 985edce98491..29afe3df9d98 100644
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -6102,6 +6102,10 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
> > }
> >
> > memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_OOM);
> > +
> > + if (!cgroup_is_populated(memcg->css.cgroup))
> > + break;
> > +
> > if (!mem_cgroup_oom_kill(memcg, GFP_KERNEL, 0))
> > break;
> > }
> > --
> > 2.18.2
> >
--
Thanks
Yafang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-05-04 3:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-05-02 14:34 [PATCH 0/2] memcg oom: don't try to kill a process if there is no process Yafang Shao
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: better name mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() Yafang Shao
2020-05-03 22:20 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-02 14:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: don't try to kill a process if memcg is not populated Yafang Shao
2020-05-03 22:59 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-04 3:03 ` Yafang Shao
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).