[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1706151459530.64172@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: prevent additional oom kills before memory is
freed
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Yes, quite a bit in testing.
> >
> > One oom kill shows the system to be oom:
> >
> > [22999.488705] Node 0 Normal free:90484kB min:90500kB ...
> > [22999.488711] Node 1 Normal free:91536kB min:91948kB ...
> >
> > followed up by one or more unnecessary oom kills showing the oom killer
> > racing with memory freeing of the victim:
> >
> > [22999.510329] Node 0 Normal free:229588kB min:90500kB ...
> > [22999.510334] Node 1 Normal free:600036kB min:91948kB ...
> >
> > The patch is absolutely required for us to prevent continuous oom killing
> > of processes after a single process has been oom killed and its memory is
> > in the process of being freed.
>
> OK, could you play with the patch/idea suggested in
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170615122031.GL1486@dhcp22.suse.cz?
>
I cannot, I am trying to unblock a stable kernel release to my production
that is obviously fixed with this patch and cannot experiment with
uncompiled and untested patches that introduce otherwise unnecessary
locking into the __mmput() path and is based on speculation rather than
hard data that __mmput() for some reason stalls for the oom victim's mm.
I was hoping that this fix could make it in time for 4.12 since 4.12 kills
1-4 processes unnecessarily for each oom condition and then can review any
tested solution you may propose at a later time.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists