[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201605262330.EEB52182.OtMFOJHFLOSFVQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 23:30:06 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: rientjes@...gle.com, oleg@...hat.com, vdavydov@...allels.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mhocko@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] mm, oom: do not loop over all tasks if there are no external tasks sharing mm
Michal Hocko wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 5bb2f7698ad7..0e33e912f7e4 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -820,6 +820,13 @@ void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, struct task_struct *p,
> task_unlock(victim);
>
> /*
> + * skip expensive iterations over all tasks if we know that there
> + * are no users outside of threads in the same thread group
> + */
> + if (atomic_read(&mm->mm_users) <= get_nr_threads(victim))
> + goto oom_reap;
Is this really safe? Isn't it possible that victim thread's thread group has
more than atomic_read(&mm->mm_users) threads which are past exit_mm() and blocked
at exit_task_work() which are before __exit_signal() from release_task() from
exit_notify()?
> +
> + /*
> * Kill all user processes sharing victim->mm in other thread groups, if
> * any. They don't get access to memory reserves, though, to avoid
> * depletion of all memory. This prevents mm->mmap_sem livelock when an
Powered by blists - more mailing lists