[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090109113910.5edcc8ab.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:39:10 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com, menage@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] memcg: make oom less frequently
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:29:22 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> > > @@ -870,8 +870,13 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))
> > > goto nomem;
> > >
> > > + if (signal_pending(current))
> > > + goto oom;
> > > +
> >
> > I think it's better to avoid to add this check *now*. and "signal is pending"
> > doesn't mean oom situation.
> >
> hmm.. charge is assumed to return 0 or -ENOMEM, what should we return on
> signal_pending case ?
>
> In case of shmem for example, if charge at shmem_getpage fails by -ENOMEM,
> shmem_fault returns VM_FAULT_OOM, so pagefault_out_of_memory would be called.
> If memcg had not invoked oom-killer, system wide oom would be invoked.
>
yes, that's problem.
I think generic -EAGAIN support is appreciated. But it will not be for -rc ;)
(... that will make codes other than memcontrol.c more complicated.)
Thanks,
-Kame
> > Hmm..Maybe we can tell "please retry page fault again, it's too long latency in
> > memory reclaim and you received signal." in future.
> >
> OK.
>
> > IMHO, only quick path which we can add here now is
> > ==
> > if (test_thread_flag(TIG_MEMDIE)) { /* This thread is killed by OOM */
> > *memcg = NULL;
> > return 0;
> > }
> > ==
> > like this.
> >
> > Anyway, please discuss this "quick exit path" in other patch and just remove
> > siginal check.
> >
> > Other part looks ok to me.
> >
> Thanks :)
>
> I'll update this one by removing the signal_pendign check.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Daisuke Nishimura.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists