linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH memcg 0/1] false global OOM triggered by memcg-limited task

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: <153f7aa6-39ef-f064-8745-a9489e088239@virtuozzo.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Oct 2021 21:52:14 +0300
From:   Vasily Averin <vvs@...tuozzo.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg 0/1] false global OOM triggered by memcg-limited
 task

On 18.10.2021 18:07, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 5:27 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
>>
>> [restore the cc list]
>>
>> On Mon 18-10-21 15:14:26, Vasily Averin wrote:
>>> On 18.10.2021 14:53, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Mon 18-10-21 13:05:35, Vasily Averin wrote:
>>>>> On 18.10.2021 12:04, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>> Here we call try_charge_memcg() that return success and approve the allocation,
>>>>> however then we hit into kmem limit and fail the allocation.
>>>>
>>>> Just to make sure I understand this would be for the v1 kmem explicit
>>>> limit, correct?
>>>
>>> yes, I mean this limit.
>>
>> OK, thanks for the clarification. This is a known problem. Have a look
>> at I think we consider that one to 0158115f702b ("memcg, kmem: deprecate
>> kmem.limit_in_bytes"). We are reporting the deprecated and to-be removed
>> status since 2019 without any actual report sugested by the kernel
>> message. Maybe we should try and remove it and see whether that prompts
>> some pushback.
>>
> 
> Yes, I think now should be the right time to take the next step for
> deprecation of kmem limits:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20201118175726.2453120-1-shakeelb@google.com/

Are you going to push it to stable kernels too?

Thank you,
	Vasily Averin