Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1743239
| From | "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message |
| Date | 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwfP6-ur-61@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <uusnn-8uO-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uuyM9-4cw-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <uw758-6FT-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 10/2/17 4:20 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 28-09-17 13:36:57, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >> On 2017/09/28 6:46, Yang Shi wrote: >>> Changelog v7 —> v8: >>> * Adopted Michal’s suggestion to dump unreclaim slab info when unreclaimable slabs amount > total user memory. Not only in oom panic path. >> >> Holding slab_mutex inside dump_unreclaimable_slab() was refrained since V2 >> because there are >> >> mutex_lock(&slab_mutex); >> kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL); >> mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex); >> >> users. If we call dump_unreclaimable_slab() for non OOM panic path, aren't we >> introducing a risk of crash (i.e. kernel panic) for regular OOM path? > > yes we are > >> We can try mutex_trylock() from dump_unreclaimable_slab() at best. >> But it is still remaining unsafe, isn't it? > > using the trylock sounds like a reasonable compromise. OK, it sounds we reach agreement on trylock. Will solve those comments in v9. Thanks, Yang >
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-09-27 23:50 +0200
[PATCH 2/2] mm: oom: show unreclaimable slab info when unreclaimable slabs > user memory "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-09-27 23:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: oom: show unreclaimable slab info when unreclaimable slabs > user memory Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2017-10-01 08:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2017-09-28 06:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-09-28 19:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2017-09-28 22:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-09-28 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2017-09-28 22:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-09-30 00:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2017-09-30 13:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-10-02 13:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message "Yang Shi" <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200
csiph-web