| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:04:15 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] oom-kill: fix NUMA consraint check with
nodemask v3
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:49:51 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>
> > Index: mm-test-kernel/drivers/char/sysrq.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- mm-test-kernel.orig/drivers/char/sysrq.c
> > +++ mm-test-kernel/drivers/char/sysrq.c
> > @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ static struct sysrq_key_op sysrq_term_op
> >
> > static void moom_callback(struct work_struct *ignored)
> > {
> > - out_of_memory(node_zonelist(0, GFP_KERNEL), GFP_KERNEL, 0);
> > + out_of_memory(node_zonelist(0, GFP_KERNEL), GFP_KERNEL, 0, NULL);
> > }
> >
> > static DECLARE_WORK(moom_work, moom_callback);
> > Index: mm-test-kernel/mm/oom_kill.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- mm-test-kernel.orig/mm/oom_kill.c
> > +++ mm-test-kernel/mm/oom_kill.c
> > @@ -196,27 +196,45 @@ unsigned long badness(struct task_struct
> > /*
> > * Determine the type of allocation constraint.
> > */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> > static inline enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > - gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > + gfp_t gfp_mask, nodemask_t *nodemask)
>
> We should probably remove the inline specifier, there's only one caller
> currently and if additional ones were added in the future this function
> should probably not be replicated.
>
Hmm, ok, remove.
> > {
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> > struct zone *zone;
> > struct zoneref *z;
> > enum zone_type high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask);
> > - nodemask_t nodes = node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY];
> > + int ret = CONSTRAINT_NONE;
> >
> > - for_each_zone_zonelist(zone, z, zonelist, high_zoneidx)
> > - if (cpuset_zone_allowed_softwall(zone, gfp_mask))
> > - node_clear(zone_to_nid(zone), nodes);
> > - else
> > + /*
> > + * The nodemask here is a nodemask passed to alloc_pages(). Now,
> > + * cpuset doesn't use this nodemask for its hardwall/softwall/hierarchy
> > + * feature. mempolicy is an only user of nodemask here.
> > + */
> > + if (nodemask) {
> > + nodemask_t mask;
> > + /* check mempolicy's nodemask contains all N_HIGH_MEMORY */
> > + nodes_and(mask, *nodemask, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]);
> > + if (!nodes_equal(mask, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]))
> > + return CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY;
> > + }
>
> Although a nodemask_t was previously allocated on the stack, we should
> probably change this to use NODEMASK_ALLOC() for kernels with higher
> CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT since allocations can happen very deep into the stack.
>
> There should be a way around that, however. Shouldn't
>
> if (nodes_subset(node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY], *nodemask))
> return CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY;
>
> be sufficient?
>
Ah, I didn't notice nodes_subset(). Thank you, I'll use it.
> > +
> > + /* Check this allocation failure is caused by cpuset's wall function */
> > + for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> > + high_zoneidx, nodemask)
> > + if (!cpuset_zone_allowed_softwall(zone, gfp_mask))
> > return CONSTRAINT_CPUSET;
> >
> > - if (!nodes_empty(nodes))
> > - return CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY;
> > -#endif
> > + /* __GFP_THISNODE never calls OOM.*/
> >
> > return CONSTRAINT_NONE;
> > }
> > +#else
> > +static inline enum oom_constraint constrained_alloc(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > + gfp_t gfp_mask, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> > +{
> > + return CONSTRAINT_NONE;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> >
> > /*
> > * Simple selection loop. We chose the process with the highest
> > @@ -603,7 +621,8 @@ rest_and_return:
> > * OR try to be smart about which process to kill. Note that we
> > * don't have to be perfect here, we just have to be good.
> > */
> > -void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask, int order)
> > +void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zonelist, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > + int order, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> > {
> > unsigned long freed = 0;
> > enum oom_constraint constraint;
> > @@ -622,11 +641,12 @@ void out_of_memory(struct zonelist *zone
> > * Check if there were limitations on the allocation (only relevant for
> > * NUMA) that may require different handling.
> > */
> > - constraint = constrained_alloc(zonelist, gfp_mask);
> > + constraint = constrained_alloc(zonelist, gfp_mask, nodemask);
> > read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> >
> > switch (constraint) {
> > case CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY:
> > + /* kill by process's its own memory alloc limitation */
>
> I don't understand this comment.
>
remove this. But it seems not to be well known that current is always killed if
CONSTRAINT_MEMPOLICY.
> > oom_kill_process(current, gfp_mask, order, 0, NULL,
> > "No available memory (MPOL_BIND)");
> > break;
> > Index: mm-test-kernel/mm/page_alloc.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- mm-test-kernel.orig/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ mm-test-kernel/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -1667,9 +1667,15 @@ __alloc_pages_may_oom(gfp_t gfp_mask, un
> > /* The OOM killer will not help higher order allocs */
> > if (order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL))
> > goto out;
> > -
> > + /*
> > + * In usual, GFP_THISNODE contains __GFP_NORETRY and we never hit this.
> > + * Sanity check for bare calls of __GFP_THISNODE, not real OOM.
> > + * Note: Hugepage uses it but will hit PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER.
> > + */
> > + if (gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)
> > + goto out;
> > /* Exhausted what can be done so it's blamo time */
> > - out_of_memory(zonelist, gfp_mask, order);
> > + out_of_memory(zonelist, gfp_mask, order, nodemask);
> >
> > out:
> > clear_zonelist_oom(zonelist, gfp_mask);
>
> This doesn't seem like the right place for this check; should we even try
> direct reclaim for bare users of __GFP_THISNODE?
No, hugepage has to do reclaim.
> If we're adding it for sanity even though no callers would currently hit it,
> it also is a potential escape route for __GFP_NOFAIL.
will add __GFP_NOFAIL check.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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