Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1445991
| From | David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path |
| Date | 2016-07-19 04:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rWsDT-68O-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rWcfL-3Nz-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <rWcpr-3TV-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Michal Hocko wrote: > David Rientjes was objecting that such an approach wouldn't help if the > oom victim was blocked on a lock held by process doing mempool_alloc. This > is very similar to other oom deadlock situations and we have oom_reaper > to deal with them so it is reasonable to rely on the same mechanism > rather inventing a different one which has negative side effects. > Right, this causes oom livelock as described in the aforementioned thread: the oom victim is waiting on a mutex that is held by a thread doing mempool_alloc(). The oom reaper is not guaranteed to free any memory, so nothing on the system can allocate memory from the page allocator. I think the better solution here is to allow mempool_alloc() users to set __GFP_NOMEMALLOC if they are in a context which allows them to deplete memory reserves.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH 0/2] mempool vs. page allocator interaction Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-18 10:40 +0200
[RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-18 10:50 +0200
[RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-18 10:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> - 2016-07-20 00:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> - 2016-07-22 10:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2016-07-22 11:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-22 11:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2016-07-23 02:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-25 10:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm, mempool: do not throttle PF_LESS_THROTTLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-25 21:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2016-07-19 04:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-19 09:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-07-19 16:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-19 16:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> - 2016-07-20 00:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2016-07-19 22:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-20 10:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2016-07-20 23:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-21 11:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-07-21 14:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-21 17:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-07-21 17:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2016-07-22 03:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-22 08:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-07-22 14:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-07-22 21:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-07-23 21:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> - 2016-07-20 00:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mempool: do not consume memory reserves from the reclaim path Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-07-20 08:50 +0200
csiph-web