[PATCH 5.10.y] memcg: fix soft lockup in the OOM process

[PATCH 5.10.y] memcg: fix soft lockup in the OOM process

[Abdelkareem Abdelsaamad]

From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>

[ Upstream commit ade81479c7dda1ce3eedb215c78bc615bbd04f06 ]

A soft lockup issue was found in the product with about 56,000 tasks were
in the OOM cgroup, it was traversing them when the soft lockup was
triggered.

watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 23s! [VM Thread:1503066]
CPU: 2 PID: 1503066 Comm: VM Thread Kdump: loaded Tainted: G
Hardware name: Huawei Cloud OpenStack Nova, BIOS
RIP: 0010:console_unlock+0x343/0x540
RSP: 0000:ffffb751447db9a0 EFLAGS: 00000247 ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffff13
RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00000000ffffffff
RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 0000000000000247
RBP: ffffffffafc71f90 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000040
R10: 0000000000000080 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffffffffafc74bd0
R13: ffffffffaf60a220 R14: 0000000000000247 R15: 0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007f2fe6ad91f0 CR3: 00000004b2076003 CR4: 0000000000360ee0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
 vprintk_emit+0x193/0x280
 printk+0x52/0x6e
 dump_task+0x114/0x130
 mem_cgroup_scan_tasks+0x76/0x100
 dump_header+0x1fe/0x210
 oom_kill_process+0xd1/0x100
 out_of_memory+0x125/0x570
 mem_cgroup_out_of_memory+0xb5/0xd0
 try_charge+0x720/0x770
 mem_cgroup_try_charge+0x86/0x180
 mem_cgroup_try_charge_delay+0x1c/0x40
 do_anonymous_page+0xb5/0x390
 handle_mm_fault+0xc4/0x1f0

This is because thousands of processes are in the OOM cgroup, it takes a
long time to traverse all of them.  As a result, this lead to soft lockup
in the OOM process.

To fix this issue, call 'cond_resched' in the 'mem_cgroup_scan_tasks'
function per 1000 iterations.  For global OOM, call
'touch_softlockup_watchdog' per 1000 iterations to avoid this issue.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241224025238.3768787-1-chenridong@huaweicloud.com
Fixes: 9cbb78bb3143 ("mm, memcg: introduce own oom handler to iterate only over its own threads")
Signed-off-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[Conflict due to
2ea465878344 ("mm: update mark_victim tracepoints field")
not in the tree]
Signed-off-by: Abdelkareem Abdelsaamad <kareemem@amazon.com>
---
 mm/memcontrol.c | 7 ++++++-
 mm/oom_kill.c   | 8 +++++++-
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 8de7c72ae025..14f26b3b0204 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1312,6 +1312,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 {
 	struct mem_cgroup *iter;
 	int ret = 0;
+	int i = 0;
 
 	BUG_ON(memcg == root_mem_cgroup);
 
@@ -1320,8 +1321,12 @@ int mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 		struct task_struct *task;
 
 		css_task_iter_start(&iter->css, CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS, &it);
-		while (!ret && (task = css_task_iter_next(&it)))
+		while (!ret && (task = css_task_iter_next(&it))) {
+			/* Avoid potential softlockup warning */
+			if ((++i & 1023) == 0)
+				cond_resched();
 			ret = fn(task, arg);
+		}
 		css_task_iter_end(&it);
 		if (ret) {
 			mem_cgroup_iter_break(memcg, iter);
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 3d7c557fb70c..ba333cc560d8 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
 #include <linux/mmu_notifier.h>
+#include <linux/nmi.h>
 
 #include <asm/tlb.h>
 #include "internal.h"
@@ -430,10 +431,15 @@ static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc)
 		mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, dump_task, oc);
 	else {
 		struct task_struct *p;
+		int i = 0;
 
 		rcu_read_lock();
-		for_each_process(p)
+		for_each_process(p) {
+			/* Avoid potential softlockup warning */
+			if ((++i & 1023) == 0)
+				touch_softlockup_watchdog();
 			dump_task(p, oc);
+		}
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
 }
-- 
2.47.1

Re: [PATCH 5.10.y] memcg: fix soft lockup in the OOM process

[Sasha Levin]

[ Sasha's backport helper bot ]

Hi,

Summary of potential issues:
❌ Build failures detected

The upstream commit SHA1 provided is correct: ade81479c7dda1ce3eedb215c78bc615bbd04f06

WARNING: Author mismatch between patch and upstream commit:
Backport author: Abdelkareem Abdelsaamad<kareemem@amazon.com>
Commit author: Chen Ridong<chenridong@huawei.com>

Status in newer kernel trees:
6.13.y | Present (different SHA1: 465768342918)
6.12.y | Present (different SHA1: c3a3741db8c1)
6.6.y | Present (different SHA1: 972486d37169)
6.1.y | Present (different SHA1: 0a09d56e1682)
5.15.y | Present (different SHA1: a9042dbc1ed4)

Note: The patch differs from the upstream commit:
---
Failed to apply patch cleanly.
---

Results of testing on various branches:

| Branch                    | Patch Apply | Build Test |
|---------------------------|-------------|------------|
| stable/linux-5.10.y       |  Failed     |  N/A       |

Build Errors:
Patch failed to apply on stable/linux-5.10.y. Reject:

diff a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c	(rejected hunks)
@@ -1312,6 +1312,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 {
 	struct mem_cgroup *iter;
 	int ret = 0;
+	int i = 0;
 
 	BUG_ON(memcg == root_mem_cgroup);
 
@@ -1320,8 +1321,12 @@ int mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 		struct task_struct *task;
 
 		css_task_iter_start(&iter->css, CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS, &it);
-		while (!ret && (task = css_task_iter_next(&it)))
+		while (!ret && (task = css_task_iter_next(&it))) {
+			/* Avoid potential softlockup warning */
+			if ((++i & 1023) == 0)
+				cond_resched();
 			ret = fn(task, arg);
+		}
 		css_task_iter_end(&it);
 		if (ret) {
 			mem_cgroup_iter_break(memcg, iter);
diff a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c	(rejected hunks)
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
 #include <linux/mmu_notifier.h>
+#include <linux/nmi.h>
 
 #include <asm/tlb.h>
 #include "internal.h"
@@ -430,10 +431,15 @@ static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc)
 		mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, dump_task, oc);
 	else {
 		struct task_struct *p;
+		int i = 0;
 
 		rcu_read_lock();
-		for_each_process(p)
+		for_each_process(p) {
+			/* Avoid potential softlockup warning */
+			if ((++i & 1023) == 0)
+				touch_softlockup_watchdog();
 			dump_task(p, oc);
+		}
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
 }

Re: [PATCH 5.10.y] memcg: fix soft lockup in the OOM process

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 06:03:09PM +0000, Abdelkareem Abdelsaamad wrote:
> From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>
> 
> [ Upstream commit ade81479c7dda1ce3eedb215c78bc615bbd04f06 ]
> 
> A soft lockup issue was found in the product with about 56,000 tasks were
> in the OOM cgroup, it was traversing them when the soft lockup was
> triggered.

Why are you submitting backports for commits already in the requested
stable trees?

confused,

greg k-h