linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	"Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz" <a.miskiewicz@gmail.com>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
	"cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Aleksa Sarai" <asarai@suse.de>, "Jay Kamat" <jgkamat@fb.com>,
	"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:00:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190127230031.GA26788@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e865a044-2c10-9858-f4ef-254bc71d6cc2@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>

On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 11:57:38PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/01/27 20:40, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Sun 27-01-19 19:56:06, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >> On 2019/01/27 17:37, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the analysis and the patch. This should work, I believe but
> >>> I am not really thrilled to overload the meaning of the MMF_UNSTABLE.
> >>> The flag is meant to signal accessing address space is not stable and it
> >>> is not aimed to synchronize oom reaper with the oom path.
> >>>
> >>> Can we make use mark_oom_victim directly? I didn't get to think that
> >>> through right now so I might be missing something but this should
> >>> prevent repeating queueing as well.
> >>
> >> Yes, TIF_MEMDIE would work. But you are planning to remove TIF_MEMDIE. Also,
> >> TIF_MEMDIE can't avoid enqueuing many threads sharing mm_struct to the OOM
> >> reaper. There is no need to enqueue many threads sharing mm_struct because
> >> the OOM reaper acts on mm_struct rather than task_struct. Thus, enqueuing
> >> based on per mm_struct flag sounds better, but MMF_OOM_VICTIM cannot be
> >> set from wake_oom_reaper(victim) because victim's mm might be already inside
> >> exit_mmap() when wake_oom_reaper(victim) is called after task_unlock(victim).
> >>
> >> We could reintroduce MMF_OOM_KILLED in commit 855b018325737f76
> >> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task")
> >> if you don't like overloading the meaning of the MMF_UNSTABLE. But since
> >> MMF_UNSTABLE is available in Linux 4.9+ kernels (which covers all LTS stable
> >> versions with the OOM reaper support), we can temporarily use MMF_UNSTABLE
> >> for ease of backporting.
> > 
> > I agree that a per-mm state is more optimal but I would rather fix the
> > issue in a clear way first and only then think about an optimization on
> > top. Queueing based on mark_oom_victim (whatever that uses to guarantee
> > the victim is marked atomically and only once) makes sense from the
> > conceptual point of view and it makes a lot of sense to start from
> > there. MMF_UNSTABLE has a completely different purpose. So unless you
> > see a correctness issue with that then I would rather go that way.
> > 
> 
> Then, adding a per mm_struct flag is better. I don't see the difference
> between reusing MMF_UNSTABLE as a flag for whether wake_oom_reaper() for
> that victim's memory was already called (what you think as an overload)
> and reusing TIF_MEMDIE as a flag for whether wake_oom_reaper() for that
> victim thread can be called (what I think as an overload). We want to
> remove TIF_MEMDIE, and we can actually remove TIF_MEMDIE if you stop
> whack-a-mole "can you observe it in real workload/program?" game.
> I don't see a correctness issue with TIF_MEMDIE but I don't want to go
> TIF_MEMDIE way.
> 
> 
> 
> From 9c9e935fc038342c48461aabca666f1b544e32b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:51:37 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH v3] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice
> 
> Arkadiusz reported that enabling memcg's group oom killing causes
> strange memcg statistics where there is no task in a memcg despite
> the number of tasks in that memcg is not 0. It turned out that there
> is a bug in wake_oom_reaper() which allows enqueuing same task twice
> which makes impossible to decrease the number of tasks in that memcg
> due to a refcount leak.
> 
> This bug existed since the OOM reaper became invokable from
> task_will_free_mem(current) path in out_of_memory() in Linux 4.7,
> but memcg's group oom killing made it easier to trigger this bug by
> calling wake_oom_reaper() on the same task from one out_of_memory()
> request.
> 
> Fix this bug using an approach used by commit 855b018325737f76
> ("oom, oom_reaper: disable oom_reaper for oom_kill_allocating_task").
> As a side effect of this patch, this patch also avoids enqueuing
> multiple threads sharing memory via task_will_free_mem(current) path.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Reported-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
> Tested-by: Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
> Fixes: af8e15cc85a25315 ("oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue task if it is on the oom_reaper_list head")

Thank you, Tetsuo!

Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-01-27 23:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <df806a77-3327-9db5-8be2-976fde1c84e5@gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <20190117122535.njcbqhlmzozdkncw@mikami>
     [not found]   ` <1d36b181-cbaf-6694-1a31-2f7f55d15675@gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <96ef6615-a5df-30af-b4dc-417a18ca63f1@gmail.com>
2019-01-25  7:52       ` pids.current with invalid value for hours [5.0.0 rc3 git] Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2019-01-25 16:37         ` Tejun Heo
2019-01-25 19:47           ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2019-01-26  1:27             ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-26  2:41               ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2019-01-26  6:10                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-26  7:55                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-26 11:09                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-26 11:29                       ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2019-01-26 13:10                         ` [PATCH v2] oom, oom_reaper: do not enqueue same task twice Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27  8:37                           ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-27 10:56                             ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27 11:40                               ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-27 14:57                                 ` [PATCH v3] " Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-27 16:58                                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-27 23:00                                   ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2019-01-28 18:15                                   ` Andrew Morton
2019-01-28 18:42                                     ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-28 21:53                                   ` Johannes Weiner
2019-01-29 10:34                                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-26  1:41             ` pids.current with invalid value for hours [5.0.0 rc3 git] Roman Gushchin
2019-01-26  2:28               ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz

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=20190127230031.GA26788@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com \
    --to=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=a.miskiewicz@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=asarai@suse.de \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jgkamat@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).