[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100531164354.GA9991@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 18:43:54 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] oom: select_bad_process: PF_EXITING check should
take ->mm into account
Thanks a lot Kosaki for doing this!
I still can't find the time to play with this code :/
On 05/31, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> select_bad_process() checks PF_EXITING to detect the task which is going
> to release its memory, but the logic is very wrong.
>
> - a single process P with the dead group leader disables
> select_bad_process() completely, it will always return
> ERR_PTR() while P can live forever
>
> - if the PF_EXITING task has already released its ->mm
> it doesn't make sense to expect it is goiing to free
> more memory (except task_struct/etc)
>
> Change the code to ignore the PF_EXITING tasks without ->mm.
>
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
> * the process of exiting and releasing its resources.
> * Otherwise we could get an easy OOM deadlock.
> */
> - if (p->flags & PF_EXITING) {
> + if ((p->flags & PF_EXITING) && p->mm) {
(strictly speaking, this change is needed after 3/5 which removes the
top-level "if (!p->mm)" check in select_bad_process).
I'd like to add a note... with or without this, we have problems
with the coredump. A thread participating in the coredumping
(group-leader in this case) can have PF_EXITING && mm, but this doesn't
mean it is going to exit soon, and the dumper can use a lot more memory.
Otoh, if select_bad_process() chooses the thread which dumps the core,
SIGKILL can't stop it. This should be fixed in do_coredump() paths, this
is the long-standing problem.
And, as it was already discussed, we only check the group-leader here.
But I can't suggest something better.
Oleg.
--
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