Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1229910
| From | Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks |
| Date | 2015-09-22 07:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qbot3-4wd-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qa6HV-7Th-75@gated-at.bofh.it> <qa7kB-pY-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qalQB-4Aq-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qart0-48K-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qbiQF-4KR-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
David Rientjes wrote:
> Your proposal, which I mostly agree with, tries to kill additional
> processes so that they allocate and drop the lock that the original victim
> depends on. My approach, from
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144010444913702, is the same, but
> without the killing. It's unecessary to kill every process on the system
> that is depending on the same lock, and we can't know which processes are
> stalling on that lock and which are not.
Would you try your approach with below program?
(My reproducers are tested on XFS on a VM with 4 CPUs / 2048MB RAM.)
---------- oom-depleter3.c start ----------
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <sched.h>
static int zero_fd = EOF;
static char *buf = NULL;
static unsigned long size = 0;
static int dummy(void *unused)
{
static char buffer[4096] = { };
int fd = open("/tmp/file", O_WRONLY | O_CREAT | O_APPEND, 0600);
while (write(fd, buffer, sizeof(buffer) == sizeof(buffer)) &&
fsync(fd) == 0);
return 0;
}
static int trigger(void *unused)
{
read(zero_fd, buf, size); /* Will cause OOM due to overcommit */
return 0;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
unsigned long i;
zero_fd = open("/dev/zero", O_RDONLY);
for (size = 1048576; size < 512UL * (1 << 30); size <<= 1) {
char *cp = realloc(buf, size);
if (!cp) {
size >>= 1;
break;
}
buf = cp;
}
/*
* Create many child threads in order to enlarge time lag between
* the OOM killer sets TIF_MEMDIE to thread group leader and
* the OOM killer sends SIGKILL to that thread.
*/
for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
clone(dummy, malloc(1024) + 1024, CLONE_SIGHAND | CLONE_VM,
NULL);
}
/* Let a child thread trigger the OOM killer. */
clone(trigger, malloc(4096)+ 4096, CLONE_SIGHAND | CLONE_VM, NULL);
/* Deplete all memory reserve using the time lag. */
for (i = size; i; i -= 4096)
buf[i - 1] = 1;
return * (char *) NULL; /* Kill all threads. */
}
---------- oom-depleter3.c end ----------
uptime > 350 of http://I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp/tmp/serial-20150922-1.txt.xz
shows that the memory reserves completely depleted and
uptime > 42 of http://I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp/tmp/serial-20150922-2.txt.xz
shows that the memory reserves was not used at all.
Is this result what you expected?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Kyle Walker <kwalker@redhat.com> - 2015-09-17 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-17 21:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2015-09-18 17:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-18 18:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-18 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-18 19:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2015-09-18 19:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-18 21:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2015-09-18 21:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2015-09-19 00:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-19 10:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-19 16:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-19 18:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-22 01:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-22 07:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-23 01:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Kyle Walker <kwalker@redhat.com> - 2015-09-23 14:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-24 14:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-19 16:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-22 01:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-19 10:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-19 10:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-22 01:10 +0200
can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-19 17:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-19 17:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-19 18:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-20 15:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-09-20 00:30 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Raymond Jennings <shentino@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 01:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-09-20 01:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-20 11:40 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-20 15:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-20 15:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-09-20 20:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Raymond Jennings <shentino@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 21:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-21 16:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-21 15:50 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-21 16:30 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-21 17:40 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-21 18:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-22 18:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-23 01:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-23 23:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-24 23:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-09-25 11:40 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-25 18:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-28 18:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-29 00:30 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-10-02 14:40 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-10-02 21:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-10-05 16:50 +0200
Can't we use timeout based OOM warning/killing? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-10-03 08:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-29 00:30 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-29 10:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-30 01:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-30 06:30 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-30 12:30 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-30 23:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-10-01 14:20 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-10-01 16:50 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-10-02 15:10 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-21 19:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-22 14:50 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-22 16:40 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-22 16:50 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-09-22 01:50 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-09-21 19:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2015-09-20 17:00 +0200
Re: can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-20 17:00 +0200
csiph-web