linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com, oleg@redhat.com,
	vdavydov@parallels.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
	hughd@google.com, riel@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ?
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:46:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160621114643.GE30848@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201606212003.FFB35429.QtMOJFFFOLSHVO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Tue 21-06-16 20:03:17, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 13-06-16 13:19:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I am trying to remember why we are disabling oom killer before kernel
> > > threads are frozen but not really sure about that right away.
> > 
> > OK, I guess I remember now. Say that a task would depend on a freezable
> > kernel thread to get to do_exit (stuck in wait_event etc...). We would
> > simply get stuck in oom_killer_disable for ever. So we need to address
> > it a different way.
> > 
> > One way would be what you are proposing but I guess it would be more
> > systematic to never call exit_oom_victim on a remote task.  After [1] we
> > have a solid foundation to rely only on MMF_REAPED even when TIF_MEMDIE
> > is set. It is more code than your patch so I can see a reason to go with
> > yours if the following one seems too large or ugly.
> > 
> > [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1466426628-15074-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org
> > 
> > What do you think about the following?
> 
> I'm OK with not clearing TIF_MEMDIE from a remote task. But this patch is racy.
> 
> > @@ -567,40 +612,23 @@ static void oom_reap_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
> >  	while (attempts++ < MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES && !__oom_reap_task(tsk))
> >  		schedule_timeout_idle(HZ/10);
> >  
> > -	if (attempts > MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES) {
> > -		struct task_struct *p;
> > +	tsk->oom_reaper_list = NULL;
> >  
> > +	if (attempts > MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES) {
> 
> attempts > MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES would mean that down_read_trylock()
> continuously failed. But it does not guarantee that the offending task
> shall not call up_write(&mm->mmap_sem) and arrives at mmput() from exit_mm()
> (as well as other threads which are blocked at down_read(&mm->mmap_sem) in
> exit_mm() by the offending task arrive at mmput() from exit_mm()) when the
> OOM reaper was preempted at this point.
> 
> Therefore, find_lock_task_mm() in requeue_oom_victim() could return NULL and
> the OOM reaper could fail to set MMF_OOM_REAPED (and find_lock_task_mm() in
> oom_scan_process_thread() could return NULL and the OOM killer could fail to
> select next OOM victim as well) when __mmput() got stuck.

Fair enough. As this would break no-lockup requirement we cannot go that
way. Let me think about it more.
 
> So, from the point of view of correctness, there remains an unhandled race
> window as long as you depend on find_lock_task_mm() not returning NULL.
> You will again ask "does it really matter/occur", and I can't make progress.

Sigh...
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-21 11:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-10 14:23 Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-13 11:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-21  8:31   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-21 11:03     ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-21 11:46       ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-06-21 13:27         ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-21 15:32           ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-21 17:46             ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-21 21:47               ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-22  6:40                 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-22  6:50                   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-22 10:57                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-22 12:08                       ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-22 12:15                         ` Michal Hocko

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=20160621114643.GE30848@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=vdavydov@parallels.com \
    --subject='Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ?' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
on how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox