linux-kernel - Re: [patch -mmotm] mm: invoke oom killer for __GFP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 11 May 2009 23:00:44 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mmotm] mm: invoke oom killer for __GFP_NOFAIL

Hi, Mel.

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie> wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:21:21PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:40 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hmm.. if __alloc_pages_may_oom fail to allocate free page due to order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTRY_ORDER,
>> >>>
>> >>> It will go to nopage label in __alloc_pages_slowpath.
>> >>> Then it will show the page allocation failure warning and will return.
>> >>> Retrying depends on caller.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Correct.
>> >>
>> >>> So, I think it won't loop forever.
>> >>> Do I miss something ?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> __GFP_NOFAIL allocations shouldn't fail, that's the point of the gfp flag.
>> >> So failing without attempting to free some memory is the wrong thing to
>> >> do.
>> >
>> > Thanks for quick reply.
>> > I was confused by your description.
>> > I thought you suggested we have to prevent loop forever.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>> In addition, the OOM killer can help for getting the high order pages ?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Sure, if it selects a task that will free a lot of memory, which is it's
>> >> goal.
>> >>
>> >
>> > How do we know any task have a lot of memory ?
>> > If we select wrong task and kill one ?
>> >
>> > I have a concern about innocent task.
>>
>> Now, I look over __out_of_memory.
>> For selecting better tasks in case of PAGE_ALLOC_COSTRY_ORDER, How
>> about increasing score of task which have VM_HUGETLB vma in badness ?
>>
>
> That is unjustified. It penalises a process even if it only allocated one
> hugepage and it is not a reflection of how much memory the process is using
> or how badly behaved it is.
> Even worse, if the huge page was allocated from the static hugepage pool then
> the hugepages are freed to the hugepage pool and not the page allocator when
> the process is killed. This means that killing a process using hugepages
> does not necessarily help applications requiring more memory unless they
> also want hugepages. However, a hugepage allocation will not trigger the
> OOM killer so killing processes using hugepages still does not help.

Thanks for pointing me.
In fact, I expect your great answer. :)

So, how do we prevent innocent task killing for allocation of high order page ?
I think it is trade off. but at least, we have been prevent it until now.

But this patch increases the probability of innocent task killing.
Is GFP_NOFAIL's early bailout more important than killing of innocent task ?

I am not sure.

> --
> Mel Gorman
> Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
> University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab
>



-- 
Kinds regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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/