From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@google.com>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/14] mm: BPF OOM
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 21:08:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJuCfpG1+bnFwpc4bxut_5tFtFc-s7+u2YF-suefoXq2-NijJw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250818170136.209169-1-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 10:01 AM Roman Gushchin
<roman.gushchin@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> This patchset adds an ability to customize the out of memory
> handling using bpf.
>
> It focuses on two parts:
> 1) OOM handling policy,
> 2) PSI-based OOM invocation.
>
> The idea to use bpf for customizing the OOM handling is not new, but
> unlike the previous proposal [1], which augmented the existing task
> ranking policy, this one tries to be as generic as possible and
> leverage the full power of the modern bpf.
>
> It provides a generic interface which is called before the existing OOM
> killer code and allows implementing any policy, e.g. picking a victim
> task or memory cgroup or potentially even releasing memory in other
> ways, e.g. deleting tmpfs files (the last one might require some
> additional but relatively simple changes).
>
> The past attempt to implement memory-cgroup aware policy [2] showed
> that there are multiple opinions on what the best policy is. As it's
> highly workload-dependent and specific to a concrete way of organizing
> workloads, the structure of the cgroup tree etc, a customizable
> bpf-based implementation is preferable over a in-kernel implementation
> with a dozen on sysctls.
s/on/of ?
>
> The second part is related to the fundamental question on when to
> declare the OOM event. It's a trade-off between the risk of
> unnecessary OOM kills and associated work losses and the risk of
> infinite trashing and effective soft lockups. In the last few years
> several PSI-based userspace solutions were developed (e.g. OOMd [3] or
> systemd-OOMd [4]). The common idea was to use userspace daemons to
> implement custom OOM logic as well as rely on PSI monitoring to avoid
> stalls. In this scenario the userspace daemon was supposed to handle
> the majority of OOMs, while the in-kernel OOM killer worked as the
> last resort measure to guarantee that the system would never deadlock
> on the memory. But this approach creates additional infrastructure
> churn: userspace OOM daemon is a separate entity which needs to be
> deployed, updated, monitored. A completely different pipeline needs to
> be built to monitor both types of OOM events and collect associated
> logs. A userspace daemon is more restricted in terms on what data is
> available to it. Implementing a daemon which can work reliably under a
> heavy memory pressure in the system is also tricky.
>
> [1]: https://lwn.net/ml/linux-kernel/20230810081319.65668-1-zhouchuyi@bytedance.com/
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171130152824.1591-1-guro@fb.com/
> [3]: https://github.com/facebookincubator/oomd
> [4]: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/systemd-oomd.service.html
>
> ----
>
> v1:
> 1) Both OOM and PSI parts are now implemented using bpf struct ops,
> providing a path the future extensions (suggested by Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi,
> Song Liu and Matt Bobrowski)
> 2) It's possible to create PSI triggers from BPF, no need for an additional
> userspace agent. (suggested by Suren Baghdasaryan)
> Also there is now a callback for the cgroup release event.
> 3) Added an ability to block on oom_lock instead of bailing out (suggested by Michal Hocko)
> 4) Added bpf_task_is_oom_victim (suggested by Michal Hocko)
> 5) PSI callbacks are scheduled using a separate workqueue (suggested by Suren Baghdasaryan)
>
> RFC:
> https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250428033617.3797686-1-roman.gushchin@linux.dev/
>
>
> Roman Gushchin (14):
> mm: introduce bpf struct ops for OOM handling
> bpf: mark struct oom_control's memcg field as TRUSTED_OR_NULL
> mm: introduce bpf_oom_kill_process() bpf kfunc
> mm: introduce bpf kfuncs to deal with memcg pointers
> mm: introduce bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup() bpf kfunc
> mm: introduce bpf_out_of_memory() bpf kfunc
> mm: allow specifying custom oom constraint for bpf triggers
> mm: introduce bpf_task_is_oom_victim() kfunc
> bpf: selftests: introduce read_cgroup_file() helper
> bpf: selftests: bpf OOM handler test
> sched: psi: refactor psi_trigger_create()
> sched: psi: implement psi trigger handling using bpf
> sched: psi: implement bpf_psi_create_trigger() kfunc
> bpf: selftests: psi struct ops test
>
> include/linux/bpf_oom.h | 49 +++
> include/linux/bpf_psi.h | 71 ++++
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 2 +
> include/linux/oom.h | 12 +
> include/linux/psi.h | 15 +-
> include/linux/psi_types.h | 72 +++-
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 5 +
> kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 14 +-
> kernel/sched/bpf_psi.c | 337 ++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/sched/build_utility.c | 4 +
> kernel/sched/psi.c | 130 +++++--
> mm/Makefile | 4 +
> mm/bpf_memcontrol.c | 166 +++++++++
> mm/bpf_oom.c | 157 ++++++++
> mm/oom_kill.c | 182 +++++++++-
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/cgroup_helpers.c | 39 ++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/cgroup_helpers.h | 2 +
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_oom.c | 229 ++++++++++++
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_psi.c | 224 ++++++++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_oom.c | 108 ++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_psi.c | 76 ++++
> 21 files changed, 1845 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/bpf_oom.h
> create mode 100644 include/linux/bpf_psi.h
> create mode 100644 kernel/sched/bpf_psi.c
> create mode 100644 mm/bpf_memcontrol.c
> create mode 100644 mm/bpf_oom.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_oom.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_psi.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_oom.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_psi.c
>
> --
> 2.50.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-19 4:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-18 17:01 [PATCH v1 00/14] mm: BPF OOM Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 01/14] mm: introduce bpf struct ops for OOM handling Roman Gushchin
2025-08-19 4:09 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-19 20:06 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 19:34 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-20 19:52 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 20:01 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-26 16:23 ` Amery Hung
2025-08-20 11:28 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-21 0:24 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-21 0:36 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-21 2:22 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-21 15:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-22 19:27 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-08-25 17:00 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-26 18:01 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-08-26 19:52 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-08-27 18:28 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-09-02 17:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-09-02 22:30 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-09-02 23:36 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-09-03 0:29 ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-03 23:30 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-09-04 6:39 ` Tejun Heo
2025-08-26 16:56 ` Amery Hung
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 02/14] bpf: mark struct oom_control's memcg field as TRUSTED_OR_NULL Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 9:17 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-20 22:32 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 03/14] mm: introduce bpf_oom_kill_process() bpf kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 04/14] mm: introduce bpf kfuncs to deal with memcg pointers Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 9:21 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-20 22:43 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 23:33 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 05/14] mm: introduce bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup() bpf kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 9:25 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-20 22:45 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 06/14] mm: introduce bpf_out_of_memory() " Roman Gushchin
2025-08-19 4:09 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-19 20:16 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 9:34 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-20 22:59 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 07/14] mm: allow specifying custom oom constraint for bpf triggers Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 08/14] mm: introduce bpf_task_is_oom_victim() kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 09/14] bpf: selftests: introduce read_cgroup_file() helper Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 10/14] bpf: selftests: bpf OOM handler test Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 9:33 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-08-20 22:49 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 20:23 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-08-21 0:10 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 11/14] sched: psi: refactor psi_trigger_create() Roman Gushchin
2025-08-19 4:09 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-19 20:28 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 12/14] sched: psi: implement psi trigger handling using bpf Roman Gushchin
2025-08-19 4:11 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-19 22:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-19 23:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 23:56 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-08-26 17:03 ` Amery Hung
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 13/14] sched: psi: implement bpf_psi_create_trigger() kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 20:30 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-08-21 0:36 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-22 19:13 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-08-22 19:57 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-08-25 16:56 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-08-18 17:01 ` [PATCH v1 14/14] bpf: selftests: psi struct ops test Roman Gushchin
2025-08-19 4:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan [this message]
2025-08-19 19:52 ` [PATCH v1 00/14] mm: BPF OOM Roman Gushchin
2025-08-20 21:06 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-08-21 0:01 ` Roman Gushchin
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=CAJuCfpG1+bnFwpc4bxut_5tFtFc-s7+u2YF-suefoXq2-NijJw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=surenb@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mattbobrowski@google.com \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=song@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).