[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1607151256260.7011@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:02:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc: Ondrej Kozina <okozina@...hat.com>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
Stanislav Kozina <skozina@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: System freezes after OOM
On Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 15-07-16 08:11:22, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> > The stacktraces showed that the kcryptd process was throttled when it
> > tried to do mempool allocation. Mempool adds the __GFP_NORETRY flag to the
> > allocation, but unfortunatelly, this flag doesn't prevent the allocator
> > from throttling.
>
> Yes and in fact it shouldn't prevent any throttling. The flag merely
> says that the allocation should give up rather than retry
> reclaim/compaction again and again.
>
> > I say that the process doing mempool allocation shouldn't ever be
> > throttled. Maybe add __GFP_NOTHROTTLE?
>
> A specific gfp flag would be an option but we are slowly running out of
> bit space there and I am not yet convinced PF_LESS_THROTTLE is
> unsuitable.
PF_LESS_THROTTLE will make it throttle less, but it doesn't eliminate
throttling entirely. So, maybe add PF_NO_THROTTLE? But PF_* flags are also
almost exhausted.
> I might be missing something but exactly this is what happens in
> wait_iff_congested no? If the bdi doesn't see the congestion it wakes up
> the reclaim context even before the timeout. Or are we talking past each
> other?
OK, I see that there is wait queue in congestion_wait. I didn't notice it
before.
Mikulas
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists