Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1428465
| From | Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? |
| Date | 2016-06-22 08:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rMK93-8lW-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <rMslR-5hj-53@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMtUC-6nL-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMvWq-7DO-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMy7T-xD-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMBIu-2Rm-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed 22-06-16 06:47:48, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 22-06-16 00:32:29, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > > Michal Hocko wrote: > > [...] > > > > Hmm, what about the following instead. It is rather a workaround than a > > > > full flaged fix but it seems much more easier and shouldn't introduce > > > > new issues. > > > > > > Yes, I think that will work. But I think below patch (marking signal_struct > > > to ignore TIF_MEMDIE instead of clearing TIF_MEMDIE from task_struct) on top of > > > current linux.git will implement no-lockup requirement. No race is possible unlike > > > "[PATCH 10/10] mm, oom: hide mm which is shared with kthread or global init". > > > > Not really. Because without the exit_oom_victim from oom_reaper you have > > no guarantee that the oom_killer_disable will ever return. I have > > mentioned that in the changelog. There is simply no guarantee the oom > > victim will ever reach exit_mm->exit_oom_victim. > > Why? Since any allocation after setting oom_killer_disabled = true will be > forced to fail, nobody will be blocked on waiting for memory allocation. Thus, > the TIF_MEMDIE tasks will eventually reach exit_mm->exit_oom_victim, won't it? What if it gets blocked waiting for an operation which cannot make any forward progress because it cannot proceed with an allocation (e.g. an open coded allocation retry loop - not that uncommon when sending a bio)? I mean if we want to guarantee a forward progress then there has to be something to clear the flag no matter in what state the oom victim is or give up on oom_killer_disable. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 13:20 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-21 10:40 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-21 13:50 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-21 15:30 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-06-21 17:40 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-21 20:00 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-06-21 23:50 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-22 08:50 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-22 09:00 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-06-22 13:00 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-22 14:10 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-22 14:20 +0200
Re: mm, oom_reaper: How to handle race with oom_killer_disable() ? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-06-21 14:00 +0200
csiph-web