[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <be28b3d2-3f94-806b-874d-db2248a2c3a9@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 17:06:35 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/core: Don't use dying mm as active_mm of
kthreads
On 7/29/19 4:18 AM, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 07/27/19 13:10, Waiman Long wrote:
>> It was found that a dying mm_struct where the owning task has exited
>> can stay on as active_mm of kernel threads as long as no other user
>> tasks run on those CPUs that use it as active_mm. This prolongs the
>> life time of dying mm holding up memory and other resources like swap
>> space that cannot be freed.
>>
>> Fix that by forcing the kernel threads to use init_mm as the active_mm
>> if the previous active_mm is dying.
>>
>> The determination of a dying mm is based on the absence of an owning
>> task. The selection of the owning task only happens with the CONFIG_MEMCG
>> option. Without that, there is no simple way to determine the life span
>> of a given mm. So it falls back to the old behavior.
> I don't really know a lot about this code, but does the owner field has to
> depend on CONFIG_MEMCG? ie: can't the owner be always set?
>
Yes, the owner field is only used and defined when CONFIG_MEMCG is on.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists