lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch v4] mm, oom: fix unnecessary killing of additional processes
From
Date
On 2018/07/25 6:45, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>
>> You can't apply "[patch v4] mm, oom: fix unnecessary killing of additional processes"
>> because Michal's patch which removes oom_lock serialization was added to -mm tree.
>>
>
> I've rebased the patch to linux-next and posted a v5.
>
>> You might worry about situations where __oom_reap_task_mm() is a no-op.
>> But that is not always true. There is no point with emitting
>>
>> pr_info("oom_reaper: unable to reap pid:%d (%s)\n", ...);
>> debug_show_all_locks();
>>
>> noise and doing
>>
>> set_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags);
>>
>> because exit_mmap() will not release oom_lock until __oom_reap_task_mm()
>> completes. That is, except extra noise, there is no difference with
>> current behavior which sets set_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &mm->flags) after
>> returning from __oom_reap_task_mm().
>>
>
> v5 has restructured how exit_mmap() serializes its unmapping with the oom
> reaper. It sets MMF_OOM_SKIP while holding mm->mmap_sem.
>

I think that v5 is still wrong. exit_mmap() keeps mmap_sem held for write does
not prevent oom_reap_task() from emitting the noise and setting MMF_OOM_SKIP
after timeout. Since your purpose is to wait for release of memory which could
not be reclaimed by __oom_reap_task_mm(), what if __oom_reap_task_mm() was no-op and
exit_mmap() was preempted immediately after returning from __oom_reap_task_mm() ?

Also, I believe that userspace visible knob is not needed.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-25 00:32    [W:0.075 / U:20.988 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site