From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: remove sleep from under oom_lock
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 15:49:53 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1807091548280.125566@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180709074706.30635-1-mhocko@kernel.org>
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>
> Tetsuo has pointed out that since 27ae357fa82b ("mm, oom: fix concurrent
> munlock and oom reaper unmap, v3") we have a strong synchronization
> between the oom_killer and victim's exiting because both have to take
> the oom_lock. Therefore the original heuristic to sleep for a short time
> in out_of_memory doesn't serve the original purpose.
>
> Moreover Tetsuo has noticed that the short sleep can be more harmful
> than actually useful. Hammering the system with many processes can lead
> to a starvation when the task holding the oom_lock can block for a
> long time (minutes) and block any further progress because the
> oom_reaper depends on the oom_lock as well.
>
> Drop the short sleep from out_of_memory when we hold the lock. Keep the
> sleep when the trylock fails to throttle the concurrent OOM paths a bit.
> This should be solved in a more reasonable way (e.g. sleep proportional
> to the time spent in the active reclaiming etc.) but this is much more
> complex thing to achieve. This is a quick fixup to remove a stale code.
>
> Reported-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
This reminds me:
mm/oom_kill.c
54) int sysctl_oom_dump_tasks = 1;
55)
56) DEFINE_MUTEX(oom_lock);
57)
58) #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
Would you mind documenting oom_lock to specify what it's protecting?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-09 22:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-09 7:47 [PATCH] mm, oom: remove sleep from under oom_lock Michal Hocko
2018-07-09 22:49 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2018-07-10 9:43 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-10 18:55 ` David Rientjes
2018-07-10 21:12 ` David Rientjes
2018-07-11 8:59 ` 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=alpine.DEB.2.21.1807091548280.125566@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
/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).