linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] mm/vmscan: more restrictive condition for retry in do_try_to_free

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170317183928.GA12281@cmpxchg.org>
Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2017 14:39:28 -0400
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:     Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mgorman@...e.de, vbabka@...e.cz,
        mhocko@...e.com, riel@...hat.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        guohanjun@...wei.com, qiuxishi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm/vmscan: more restrictive condition for retry in
 do_try_to_free_pages

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 07:36:48PM +0800, Yisheng Xie wrote:
> @@ -100,6 +100,9 @@ struct scan_control {
>  	/* Can cgroups be reclaimed below their normal consumption range? */
>  	unsigned int may_thrash:1;
>  
> +	/* Did we have any memcg protected by the low limit */
> +	unsigned int memcg_low_protection:1;

These are both bad names. How about the following pair?

	/*
	 * Cgroups are not reclaimed below their configured memory.low,
	 * unless we threaten to OOM. If any cgroups are skipped due to
	 * memory.low and nothing was reclaimed, go back for memory.low.
	 */
	unsigned int memcg_low_skipped:1
	unsigned int memcg_low_reclaim:1;

> @@ -2557,6 +2560,8 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
>  			unsigned long scanned;
>  
>  			if (mem_cgroup_low(root, memcg)) {
> +				sc->memcg_low_protection = 1;
> +
>  				if (!sc->may_thrash)
>  					continue;

				if (!sc->memcg_low_reclaim) {
					sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1;
					continue;
				}

>  				mem_cgroup_events(memcg, MEMCG_LOW, 1);
> @@ -2808,7 +2813,7 @@ static unsigned long do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
>  		return 1;
>  
>  	/* Untapped cgroup reserves?  Don't OOM, retry. */
> -	if (!sc->may_thrash) {
> +	if (sc->memcg_low_protection && !sc->may_thrash) {

	if (sc->memcg_low_skipped) {
		[...]
		sc->memcg_low_reclaim = 1;
		goto retry;
	}