[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1309251351001.27471@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com, security@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kthread: Make kthread_create() killable.
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Any users of wait_for_completion() might be chosen by the OOM killer while
> waiting for completion() call by some process which does memory
> allocation. kthread_create() is one of such users.
>
Any user process callers of wait_for_completion() you mean.
> When such users are chosen by the OOM killer when they are waiting for
> completion() in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, the system will be kept stressed
> due to memory starvation because the OOM killer cannot kill such users.
>
Also results in a livelock if you're running in a memcg and have hit its
limit.
> Fix this problem for kthreadd by making kthread_create() killable.
>
There appear to be other potential callers of wait_for_completion() in the
tree as well that could be holding lots of memory besides
kthread_create().
Perhaps that's beyond the scope of this particular patch, though.
wait_for_completion() is scary if that completion requires memory that
cannot be allocated because the caller is killed but uninterruptible.
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
--
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