All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: [RFC 1/6] mm, page_alloc: fix more premature OOM due to race with cpuset update
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:06:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170411140609.3787-2-vbabka@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170411140609.3787-1-vbabka@suse.cz>

Commit e47483bca2cc ("mm, page_alloc: fix premature OOM when racing with cpuset
mems update") has fixed known recent regressions found by LTP's cpuset01
testcase. I have however found that by modifying the testcase to use per-vma
mempolicies via bind(2) instead of per-task mempolicies via set_mempolicy(2),
the premature OOM still happens and the issue is much older.

The root of the problem is that the cpuset's mems_allowed and mempolicy's
nodemask can temporarily have no intersection, thus get_page_from_freelist()
cannot find any usable zone. The current semantic for empty intersection is to
ignore mempolicy's nodemask and honour cpuset restrictions. This is checked in
node_zonelist(), but the racy update can happen after we already passed the
check. Such races should be protected by the seqlock task->mems_allowed_seq,
but it doesn't work here, because 1) mpol_rebind_mm() does not happen under
seqlock for write, and doing so would lead to deadlock, as it takes mmap_sem
for write, while the allocation can have mmap_sem for read when it's taking the
seqlock for read. And 2) the seqlock cookie of callers of node_zonelist()
(alloc_pages_vma() and alloc_pages_current()) is different than the one of
__alloc_pages_slowpath(), so there's still a potential race window.

This patch fixes the issue by having __alloc_pages_slowpath() check for empty
intersection of cpuset and ac->nodemask before OOM or allocation failure. If
it's indeed empty, the nodemask is ignored and allocation retried, which mimics
node_zonelist(). This works fine, because almost all callers of
__alloc_pages_nodemask are obtaining the nodemask via node_zonelist(). The only
exception is new_node_page() from hotplug, where the potential violation of
nodemask isn't an issue, as there's already a fallback allocation attempt
without any nodemask. If there's a future caller that needs to have its specific
nodemask honoured over task's cpuset restrictions, we'll have to e.g. add a gfp
flag for that.

Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
---
 mm/page_alloc.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 32b31d661c9c..502d82f0e004 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3668,6 +3668,39 @@ should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned order,
 	return false;
 }
 
+static inline bool
+check_retry_cpuset(int cpuset_mems_cookie, struct alloc_context *ac)
+{
+	/*
+	 * It's possible that cpuset's mems_allowed and the nodemask from
+	 * mempolicy don't intersect. This should be normally dealt with by
+	 * policy_nodemask(), but it's possible to race with cpuset update in
+	 * such a way the check therein was true, and then it became false
+	 * before we got our cpuset_mems_cookie here.
+	 * This assumes that for all allocations, ac->nodemask can come only
+	 * from MPOL_BIND mempolicy (whose documented semantics is to be ignored
+	 * when it does not intersect with the cpuset restrictions) or the
+	 * caller can deal with a violated nodemask.
+	 */
+	if (cpusets_enabled() && ac->nodemask &&
+			!cpuset_nodemask_valid_mems_allowed(ac->nodemask)) {
+		ac->nodemask = NULL;
+		return true;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * When updating a task's mems_allowed or mempolicy nodemask, it is
+	 * possible to race with parallel threads in such a way that our
+	 * allocation can fail while the mask is being updated. If we are about
+	 * to fail, check if the cpuset changed during allocation and if so,
+	 * retry.
+	 */
+	if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+		return true;
+
+	return false;
+}
+
 static inline struct page *
 __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 						struct alloc_context *ac)
@@ -3863,11 +3896,9 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 				&compaction_retries))
 		goto retry;
 
-	/*
-	 * It's possible we raced with cpuset update so the OOM would be
-	 * premature (see below the nopage: label for full explanation).
-	 */
-	if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+
+	/* Deal with possible cpuset update races before we start OOM killing */
+	if (check_retry_cpuset(cpuset_mems_cookie, ac))
 		goto retry_cpuset;
 
 	/* Reclaim has failed us, start killing things */
@@ -3886,14 +3917,8 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 	}
 
 nopage:
-	/*
-	 * When updating a task's mems_allowed or mempolicy nodemask, it is
-	 * possible to race with parallel threads in such a way that our
-	 * allocation can fail while the mask is being updated. If we are about
-	 * to fail, check if the cpuset changed during allocation and if so,
-	 * retry.
-	 */
-	if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+	/* Deal with possible cpuset update races before we fail */
+	if (check_retry_cpuset(cpuset_mems_cookie, ac))
 		goto retry_cpuset;
 
 	/*
-- 
2.12.2

--
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: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: [RFC 1/6] mm, page_alloc: fix more premature OOM due to race with cpuset update
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:06:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170411140609.3787-2-vbabka@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170411140609.3787-1-vbabka@suse.cz>

Commit e47483bca2cc ("mm, page_alloc: fix premature OOM when racing with cpuset
mems update") has fixed known recent regressions found by LTP's cpuset01
testcase. I have however found that by modifying the testcase to use per-vma
mempolicies via bind(2) instead of per-task mempolicies via set_mempolicy(2),
the premature OOM still happens and the issue is much older.

The root of the problem is that the cpuset's mems_allowed and mempolicy's
nodemask can temporarily have no intersection, thus get_page_from_freelist()
cannot find any usable zone. The current semantic for empty intersection is to
ignore mempolicy's nodemask and honour cpuset restrictions. This is checked in
node_zonelist(), but the racy update can happen after we already passed the
check. Such races should be protected by the seqlock task->mems_allowed_seq,
but it doesn't work here, because 1) mpol_rebind_mm() does not happen under
seqlock for write, and doing so would lead to deadlock, as it takes mmap_sem
for write, while the allocation can have mmap_sem for read when it's taking the
seqlock for read. And 2) the seqlock cookie of callers of node_zonelist()
(alloc_pages_vma() and alloc_pages_current()) is different than the one of
__alloc_pages_slowpath(), so there's still a potential race window.

This patch fixes the issue by having __alloc_pages_slowpath() check for empty
intersection of cpuset and ac->nodemask before OOM or allocation failure. If
it's indeed empty, the nodemask is ignored and allocation retried, which mimics
node_zonelist(). This works fine, because almost all callers of
__alloc_pages_nodemask are obtaining the nodemask via node_zonelist(). The only
exception is new_node_page() from hotplug, where the potential violation of
nodemask isn't an issue, as there's already a fallback allocation attempt
without any nodemask. If there's a future caller that needs to have its specific
nodemask honoured over task's cpuset restrictions, we'll have to e.g. add a gfp
flag for that.

Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
---
 mm/page_alloc.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 32b31d661c9c..502d82f0e004 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3668,6 +3668,39 @@ should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned order,
 	return false;
 }
 
+static inline bool
+check_retry_cpuset(int cpuset_mems_cookie, struct alloc_context *ac)
+{
+	/*
+	 * It's possible that cpuset's mems_allowed and the nodemask from
+	 * mempolicy don't intersect. This should be normally dealt with by
+	 * policy_nodemask(), but it's possible to race with cpuset update in
+	 * such a way the check therein was true, and then it became false
+	 * before we got our cpuset_mems_cookie here.
+	 * This assumes that for all allocations, ac->nodemask can come only
+	 * from MPOL_BIND mempolicy (whose documented semantics is to be ignored
+	 * when it does not intersect with the cpuset restrictions) or the
+	 * caller can deal with a violated nodemask.
+	 */
+	if (cpusets_enabled() && ac->nodemask &&
+			!cpuset_nodemask_valid_mems_allowed(ac->nodemask)) {
+		ac->nodemask = NULL;
+		return true;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * When updating a task's mems_allowed or mempolicy nodemask, it is
+	 * possible to race with parallel threads in such a way that our
+	 * allocation can fail while the mask is being updated. If we are about
+	 * to fail, check if the cpuset changed during allocation and if so,
+	 * retry.
+	 */
+	if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+		return true;
+
+	return false;
+}
+
 static inline struct page *
 __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 						struct alloc_context *ac)
@@ -3863,11 +3896,9 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 				&compaction_retries))
 		goto retry;
 
-	/*
-	 * It's possible we raced with cpuset update so the OOM would be
-	 * premature (see below the nopage: label for full explanation).
-	 */
-	if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+
+	/* Deal with possible cpuset update races before we start OOM killing */
+	if (check_retry_cpuset(cpuset_mems_cookie, ac))
 		goto retry_cpuset;
 
 	/* Reclaim has failed us, start killing things */
@@ -3886,14 +3917,8 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 	}
 
 nopage:
-	/*
-	 * When updating a task's mems_allowed or mempolicy nodemask, it is
-	 * possible to race with parallel threads in such a way that our
-	 * allocation can fail while the mask is being updated. If we are about
-	 * to fail, check if the cpuset changed during allocation and if so,
-	 * retry.
-	 */
-	if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+	/* Deal with possible cpuset update races before we fail */
+	if (check_retry_cpuset(cpuset_mems_cookie, ac))
 		goto retry_cpuset;
 
 	/*
-- 
2.12.2

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-11 14:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-11 14:06 [RFC 0/6] cpuset/mempolicies related fixes and cleanups Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2017-04-11 14:06   ` [RFC 1/6] mm, page_alloc: fix more premature OOM due to race with cpuset update Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 17:24   ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-11 17:24     ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]     ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704111152170.25069-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-04-11 19:00       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 19:00         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 19:00         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12 21:25         ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-12 21:25           ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]           ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704121617040.28335-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-04-13  6:24             ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-13  6:24               ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-13  6:24               ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-14 20:37               ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-14 20:37                 ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-26  8:07                 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-26  8:07                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-30 21:33                   ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-30 21:33                     ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]                     ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704301628460.21533-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-17  9:20                       ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17  9:20                         ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17  9:20                         ` Michal Hocko
     [not found]                         ` <20170517092042.GH18247-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-17 13:56                           ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-17 13:56                             ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-17 13:56                             ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]                             ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705170855430.7925-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-17 14:05                               ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 14:05                                 ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 14:05                                 ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 14:48                                 ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-17 14:48                                   ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]                                   ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705170943090.8714-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-17 14:56                                     ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 14:56                                       ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 14:56                                       ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 15:25                                       ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-17 15:25                                         ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]                                         ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705171021570.9487-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-18  9:08                                           ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-18  9:08                                             ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-18  9:08                                             ` Michal Hocko
     [not found]                                             ` <20170518090846.GD25462-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-18 16:57                                               ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-18 16:57                                                 ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-18 16:57                                                 ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]                                                 ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705181154450.27641-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-18 17:24                                                   ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-18 17:24                                                     ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-18 17:24                                                     ` Michal Hocko
     [not found]                                                     ` <20170518172424.GB30148-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org>
2017-05-18 19:07                                                       ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-18 19:07                                                         ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-18 19:07                                                         ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-19  7:37                                                         ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-19  7:37                                                           ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-17 15:27                                       ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-17 15:27                                         ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-18 10:03                                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-05-18 10:03                                     ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-05-18 17:07                                     ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-18 17:07                                       ` Christoph Lameter
2017-05-19 11:27                                       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-05-19 11:27                                         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-13  5:42   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-04-13  5:42     ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-04-13  6:06     ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-13  6:06       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-13  6:07       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-13  6:07         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` [RFC 2/6] mm, mempolicy: stop adjusting current->il_next in mpol_rebind_nodemask() Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06   ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 17:32   ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-11 17:32     ` Christoph Lameter
     [not found]     ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704111227080.25069-wcBtFHqTun5QOdAKl3ChDw@public.gmane.org>
2017-04-11 19:03       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 19:03         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 19:03         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12  8:49         ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12  8:49           ` Vlastimil Babka
     [not found]           ` <97045760-77eb-c892-9bcb-daad10a1d91d-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>
2017-04-12 21:16             ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-12 21:16               ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-12 21:16               ` Christoph Lameter
2017-04-12 21:18               ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12 21:18                 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` [RFC 3/6] mm, page_alloc: pass preferred nid instead of zonelist to allocator Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06   ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` [RFC 4/6] mm, mempolicy: simplify rebinding mempolicies when updating cpusets Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06   ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` [RFC 5/6] mm, cpuset: always use seqlock when changing task's nodemask Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06   ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12  8:10   ` Hillf Danton
2017-04-12  8:10     ` Hillf Danton
2017-04-12  8:18     ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12  8:18       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-12  8:18       ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06 ` [RFC 6/6] mm, mempolicy: don't check cpuset seqlock where it doesn't matter Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-11 14:06   ` Vlastimil Babka

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=20170411140609.3787-2-vbabka@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    /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.