All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de,
	rientjes@google.com, riel@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
	oleg@redhat.com, andrea@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -v2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 14:22:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151201132230.GF4567@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201511281339.JHH78172.SLOQFOFHVFOMJt@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Sat 28-11-15 13:39:11, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > for write while write but the probability is reduced considerably wrt.
> 
> Is this "while write" garbage?

Fixed

> > Users of mmap_sem which need it for write should be carefully reviewed
> > to use _killable waiting as much as possible and reduce allocations
> > requests done with the lock held to absolute minimum to reduce the risk
> > even further.
> 
> It will be nice if we can have down_write_killable()/down_read_killable().

Yes that is an idea.

> > The API between oom killer and oom reaper is quite trivial. wake_oom_reaper
> > updates mm_to_reap with cmpxchg to guarantee only NUll->mm transition
> 
> NULL->mm

fixed

> > and oom_reaper clear this atomically once it is done with the work.
> 
> Can't oom_reaper() become as compact as below?

Good idea! I think we still need {READ,WRITE}_ONCE to prevent from any
potential mis optimizations, though.

Here is what I did:
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 333953bf4968..b50ce41194b3 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -477,21 +477,11 @@ static void oom_reap_vmas(struct mm_struct *mm)
 
 static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
 {
-	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
-
 	while (true) {
 		struct mm_struct *mm;
-
-		prepare_to_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-		mm = READ_ONCE(mm_to_reap);
-		if (!mm) {
-			freezable_schedule();
-			finish_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait);
-		} else {
-			finish_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait);
-			oom_reap_vmas(mm);
-			WRITE_ONCE(mm_to_reap, NULL);
-		}
+		wait_event_freezable(oom_reaper_wait, (mm = READ_ONCE(mm_to_reap)));
+		oom_reap_vmas(mm);
+		WRITE_ONCE(mm_to_reap, NULL);
 	}
 
 	return 0;
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de,
	rientjes@google.com, riel@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
	oleg@redhat.com, andrea@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -v2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 14:22:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151201132230.GF4567@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201511281339.JHH78172.SLOQFOFHVFOMJt@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Sat 28-11-15 13:39:11, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > for write while write but the probability is reduced considerably wrt.
> 
> Is this "while write" garbage?

Fixed

> > Users of mmap_sem which need it for write should be carefully reviewed
> > to use _killable waiting as much as possible and reduce allocations
> > requests done with the lock held to absolute minimum to reduce the risk
> > even further.
> 
> It will be nice if we can have down_write_killable()/down_read_killable().

Yes that is an idea.

> > The API between oom killer and oom reaper is quite trivial. wake_oom_reaper
> > updates mm_to_reap with cmpxchg to guarantee only NUll->mm transition
> 
> NULL->mm

fixed

> > and oom_reaper clear this atomically once it is done with the work.
> 
> Can't oom_reaper() become as compact as below?

Good idea! I think we still need {READ,WRITE}_ONCE to prevent from any
potential mis optimizations, though.

Here is what I did:
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 333953bf4968..b50ce41194b3 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -477,21 +477,11 @@ static void oom_reap_vmas(struct mm_struct *mm)
 
 static int oom_reaper(void *unused)
 {
-	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
-
 	while (true) {
 		struct mm_struct *mm;
-
-		prepare_to_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-		mm = READ_ONCE(mm_to_reap);
-		if (!mm) {
-			freezable_schedule();
-			finish_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait);
-		} else {
-			finish_wait(&oom_reaper_wait, &wait);
-			oom_reap_vmas(mm);
-			WRITE_ONCE(mm_to_reap, NULL);
-		}
+		wait_event_freezable(oom_reaper_wait, (mm = READ_ONCE(mm_to_reap)));
+		oom_reap_vmas(mm);
+		WRITE_ONCE(mm_to_reap, NULL);
 	}
 
 	return 0;
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-12-01 13:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-25 15:56 [RFC PATCH] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper Michal Hocko
2015-11-25 15:56 ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-25 20:08 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-11-25 20:08   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-11-26 11:08   ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-26 11:08     ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-26 15:24     ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-26 15:24       ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-26 16:34       ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-26 16:34         ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-26 17:31         ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-26 17:31           ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-27 11:29         ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-27 11:29           ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-27 12:35           ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-27 12:35             ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-27 16:12 ` [RFC PATCH -v2] " Michal Hocko
2015-11-27 16:12   ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-27 16:39   ` Mel Gorman
2015-11-27 16:39     ` Mel Gorman
2015-12-01 13:07     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-01 13:07       ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-28  4:39   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-28  4:39     ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-28 16:10     ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-28 16:10       ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-12-01 13:29       ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-01 13:29         ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-05 12:33         ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-12-05 12:33           ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-12-07 16:07           ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-07 16:07             ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-07 22:19             ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-12-07 22:19               ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-12-08 11:06               ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 11:06                 ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-01 13:22     ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2015-12-01 13:22       ` Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20151201132230.GF4567@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andrea@kernel.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.