From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, oom_reaper: skip mm structs with mmu notifiers
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:49:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170830174904.GF13559@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170830084600.17491-1-mhocko@kernel.org>
Hello Michal,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:46:00AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> + * TODO: we really want to get rid of this ugly hack and make sure that
> + * notifiers cannot block for unbounded amount of time and add
> + * mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_{start,end} around unmap_page_range
KVM already should be ok in that respect. However the major reason to
prefer mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start/end is those can block and
schedule waiting for stuff happening behind the PCI bus easily. So I'm
not sure if the TODO is good idea to keep.
> + */
> + if (mm_has_notifiers(mm)) {
> + schedule_timeout_idle(HZ);
Why the schedule_timeout? What's the difference with the OOM
reaper going to sleep again in the main loop instead?
> + goto unlock_oom;
> + }
mm_has_notifiers stops changing after obtaining the mmap_sem for
reading. See the do_mmu_notifier_register. So it's better to put the
mm_has_notifiers check immediately after the below:
> if (!down_read_trylock(&mm->mmap_sem)) {
> ret = false;
> trace_skip_task_reaping(tsk->pid);
If we succeed taking the mmap_sem for reading then we read a stable
value out of mm_has_notifiers and be sure it won't be set from under
us.
Otherwise the patch looks fine including the incremental comment about
why the mmu_notifier_invalidate_range in MMU gather wasn't enough.
Thanks!
Andrea
--
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: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, oom_reaper: skip mm structs with mmu notifiers
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:49:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170830174904.GF13559@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170830084600.17491-1-mhocko@kernel.org>
Hello Michal,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:46:00AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> + * TODO: we really want to get rid of this ugly hack and make sure that
> + * notifiers cannot block for unbounded amount of time and add
> + * mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_{start,end} around unmap_page_range
KVM already should be ok in that respect. However the major reason to
prefer mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start/end is those can block and
schedule waiting for stuff happening behind the PCI bus easily. So I'm
not sure if the TODO is good idea to keep.
> + */
> + if (mm_has_notifiers(mm)) {
> + schedule_timeout_idle(HZ);
Why the schedule_timeout? What's the difference with the OOM
reaper going to sleep again in the main loop instead?
> + goto unlock_oom;
> + }
mm_has_notifiers stops changing after obtaining the mmap_sem for
reading. See the do_mmu_notifier_register. So it's better to put the
mm_has_notifiers check immediately after the below:
> if (!down_read_trylock(&mm->mmap_sem)) {
> ret = false;
> trace_skip_task_reaping(tsk->pid);
If we succeed taking the mmap_sem for reading then we read a stable
value out of mm_has_notifiers and be sure it won't be set from under
us.
Otherwise the patch looks fine including the incremental comment about
why the mmu_notifier_invalidate_range in MMU gather wasn't enough.
Thanks!
Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-30 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-30 8:46 [RFC PATCH] mm, oom_reaper: skip mm structs with mmu notifiers Michal Hocko
2017-08-30 8:46 ` Michal Hocko
2017-08-30 9:09 ` Michal Hocko
2017-08-30 9:09 ` Michal Hocko
2017-08-30 17:49 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2017-08-30 17:49 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2017-08-31 5:29 ` Michal Hocko
2017-08-31 5:29 ` 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=20170830174904.GF13559@redhat.com \
--to=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.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.