From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, shakeelb@google.com,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, mhocko@suse.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
haifeng.xu@shopee.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: + memcg-oom-remove-explicit-wakeup-in-mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize.patch added to mm-unstable branch
Date: Tue, 02 May 2023 14:56:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230502215621.84B5AC433D2@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
The patch titled
Subject: memcg, oom: remove explicit wakeup in mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize()
has been added to the -mm mm-unstable branch. Its filename is
memcg-oom-remove-explicit-wakeup-in-mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize.patch
This patch will shortly appear at
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/25-new.git/tree/patches/memcg-oom-remove-explicit-wakeup-in-mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize.patch
This patch will later appear in the mm-unstable branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next via the mm-everything
branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
and is updated there every 2-3 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Haifeng Xu <haifeng.xu@shopee.com>
Subject: memcg, oom: remove explicit wakeup in mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize()
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 03:07:39 +0000
Before commit 29ef680ae7c2 ("memcg, oom: move out_of_memory back to the
charge path"), all memcg oom killers were delayed to page fault path. And
the explicit wakeup is used in this case:
thread A:
...
if (locked) { // complete oom-kill, hold the lock
mem_cgroup_oom_unlock(memcg);
...
}
...
thread B:
...
if (locked && !memcg->oom_kill_disable) {
...
} else {
schedule(); // can't acquire the lock
...
}
...
The reason is that thread A kicks off the OOM-killer, which leads to
wakeups from the uncharges of the exiting task. But thread B is not
guaranteed to see them if it enters the OOM path after the OOM kills but
before thread A releases the lock.
Now only oom_kill_disable case is handled from the #PF path. In that case
it is userspace to trigger the wake up not the #PF path itself. All
potential paths to free some charges are responsible to call
memcg_oom_recover() , so the explicit wakeup is not needed in the
mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize() path which doesn't release any memory itself.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230419030739.115845-2-haifeng.xu@shopee.com
Signed-off-by: Haifeng Xu <haifeng.xu@shopee.com>
Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 9 +--------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c~memcg-oom-remove-explicit-wakeup-in-mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize
+++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -2028,15 +2028,8 @@ bool mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize(bool han
mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(memcg);
finish_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &owait.wait);
- if (locked) {
+ if (locked)
mem_cgroup_oom_unlock(memcg);
- /*
- * There is no guarantee that an OOM-lock contender
- * sees the wakeups triggered by the OOM kill
- * uncharges. Wake any sleepers explicitly.
- */
- memcg_oom_recover(memcg);
- }
cleanup:
current->memcg_in_oom = NULL;
css_put(&memcg->css);
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from haifeng.xu@shopee.com are
cpuset-clean-up-cpuset_node_allowed.patch
memcg-oom-remove-unnecessary-check-in-mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize.patch
memcg-oom-remove-explicit-wakeup-in-mem_cgroup_oom_synchronize.patch
reply other threads:[~2023-05-02 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20230502215621.84B5AC433D2@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=haifeng.xu@shopee.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mm-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@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.