From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] mm, memcg: fix inconsistent oom event behavior
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 16:03:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200504160345.45801b7bf199ac5897e2572a@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200502141055.7378-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com>
On Sat, 2 May 2020 10:10:55 -0400 Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
> A recent commit 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in
> memory.events") changes the behavior of memcg events, which will
> consider subtrees in memory.events. But oom_kill event is a special one
> as it is used in both cgroup1 and cgroup2. In cgroup1, it is displayed
> in memory.oom_control. The file memory.oom_control is in both root memcg
> and non root memcg, that is different with memory.event as it only in
> non-root memcg. That commit is okay for cgroup2, but it is not okay for
> cgroup1 as it will cause inconsistent behavior between root memcg and
> non-root memcg.
>
> Here's an example on why this behavior is inconsistent in cgroup1.
> root memcg
> /
> memcg foo
> /
> memcg bar
>
> Suppose there's an oom_kill in memcg bar, then the oon_kill will be
>
> root memcg : memory.oom_control(oom_kill) 0
> /
> memcg foo : memory.oom_control(oom_kill) 1
> /
> memcg bar : memory.oom_control(oom_kill) 1
>
> For the non-root memcg, its memory.oom_control(oom_kill) includes its
> descendants' oom_kill, but for root memcg, it doesn't include its
> descendants' oom_kill. That means, memory.oom_control(oom_kill) has
> different meanings in different memcgs. That is inconsistent. Then the user
> has to know whether the memcg is root or not.
>
> If we can't fully support it in cgroup1, for example by adding
> memory.events.local into cgroup1 as well, then let's don't touch
> its original behavior.
>
> Fixes: 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in memory.events")
Nearly a year ago. Should we backport this into earlier kernels?
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -783,6 +783,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> atomic_long_inc(&memcg->memory_events[event]);
> cgroup_file_notify(&memcg->events_file);
>
> + if (!cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(memory_cgrp_subsys))
> + break;
> if (cgrp_dfl_root.flags & CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS)
> break;
> } while ((memcg = parent_mem_cgroup(memcg)) &&
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-04 23:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-02 14:10 [PATCH resend] mm, memcg: fix inconsistent oom event behavior Yafang Shao
2020-05-02 14:45 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-05-02 15:23 ` Chris Down
2020-05-04 7:54 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-04 23:03 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2020-05-05 7:29 ` 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=20200504160345.45801b7bf199ac5897e2572a@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.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.