[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180724125307.d6035c447adf46b2d74dfbd7@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 12:53:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
"David (ChunMing) Zhou" <David1.Zhou@....com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>,
Sudeep Dutt <sudeep.dutt@...el.com>,
Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@...el.com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 16:17:47 +0200 Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Fri 20-07-18 17:09:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
> [...]
> > - Undocumented return value.
> >
> > - comment "failed to reap part..." is misleading - sounds like it's
> > referring to something which happened in the past, is in fact
> > referring to something which might happen in the future.
> >
> > - fails to call trace_finish_task_reaping() in one case
> >
> > - code duplication.
> >
> > - Increases mmap_sem hold time a little by moving
> > trace_finish_task_reaping() inside the locked region. So sue me ;)
> >
> > - Sharing the finish: path means that the trace event won't
> > distinguish between the two sources of finishing.
> >
> > Please take a look?
>
> oom_reap_task_mm should return false when __oom_reap_task_mm return
> false. This is what my patch did but it seems this changed by
> http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/mm-oom-remove-oom_lock-from-oom_reaper.patch
> so that one should be fixed.
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 104ef4a01a55..88657e018714 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ static bool oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm)
> /* failed to reap part of the address space. Try again later */
> if (!__oom_reap_task_mm(mm)) {
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> - return true;
> + return false;
> }
>
> pr_info("oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB\n",
OK, thanks, I added that.
>
> On top of that the proposed cleanup looks as follows:
>
Looks good to me. Seems a bit strange that we omit the pr_info()
output if the mm was partially reaped - people would still want to know
this? Not very important though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists