From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Subject: Re: mm: mkfs.ext4 invoked oom-killer on i386 - pagecache_get_page
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 17:41:21 +0100
Message-ID: <20200528164121.GA839178@chrisdown.name>
References: <20200519084535.GG32497@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CA+G9fYvzLm7n1BE7AJXd8_49fOgPgWWTiQ7sXkVre_zoERjQKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+G9fYsXnwyGetj-vztAKPt8=jXrkY8QWe74u5EEA3XPW7aikQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200520190906.GA558281@chrisdown.name>
 <20200521095515.GK6462@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20200521163450.GV6462@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CA+G9fYuDWGZx50UpD+WcsDeHX9vi3hpksvBAWbMgRZadb0Pkww@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+G9fYs2jg-j_5fdb0OW0G-JzDjN7b8d9qnX7uuk9p4c7mVSig@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200528150310.GG27484@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CA+G9fYvDXiZ9E9EfU6h0gsJ+xaXY77mRu9Jg+J7C=X4gJ3qvLg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=chrisdown.name; s=google;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
         :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
        bh=Pvf7qBFEHIiAL/UpG9xM7Gf8VhxhCVBHlvWj3inRLaM=;
        b=dZ/4oQHkI3iFVl6Q4XDatBaCWT8WDKIy43ty6iL5UZV9y8w2Mwc2zwtaHwr00vostz
         c8tS4BvevPCZZt4NdTss07rL4pzKusdIZLJ1Zm9Z3FuwwbTD2hfas29vKN5+7iQ8CBt4
         fMhXjwXce9iKSnXnt3Jr4qQvtVDCYiR2OFQFw=
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+G9fYvDXiZ9E9EfU6h0gsJ+xaXY77mRu9Jg+J7C=X4gJ3qvLg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <cgroups.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>, Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>, "Linux F2FS DEV, Mailing List" <linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>, linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>, lkft-triage@l

Naresh Kamboju writes:
>On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 20:33, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri 22-05-20 02:23:09, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
>> > My apology !
>> > As per the test results history this problem started happening from
>> > Bad : next-20200430 (still reproducible on next-20200519)
>> > Good : next-20200429
>> >
>> > The git tree / tag used for testing is from linux next-20200430 tag and reverted
>> > following three patches and oom-killer problem fixed.
>> >
>> > Revert "mm, memcg: avoid stale protection values when cgroup is above
>> > protection"
>> > Revert "mm, memcg: decouple e{low,min} state mutations from protectinn checks"
>> > Revert "mm-memcg-decouple-elowmin-state-mutations-from-protection-checks-fix"
>>
>> The discussion has fragmented and I got lost TBH.
>> In http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+G9fYuDWGZx50UpD+WcsDeHX9vi3hpksvBAWbMgRZadb0Pkww@mail.gmail.com
>> you have said that none of the added tracing output has triggered. Does
>> this still hold? Because I still have a hard time to understand how
>> those three patches could have the observed effects.
>
>On the other email thread [1] this issue is concluded.
>
>Yafang wrote on May 22 2020,
>
>Regarding the root cause, my guess is it makes a similar mistake that
>I tried to fix in the previous patch that the direct reclaimer read a
>stale protection value.  But I don't think it is worth to add another
>fix. The best way is to revert this commit.

This isn't a conclusion, just a guess (and one I think is unlikely). For this 
to reliably happen, it implies that the same race happens the same way each 
time.