public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	jasowang@redhat.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	airlied@linux.ie, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, rodrigo.vivi@intel.com,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] mm, oom: Offload OOM notify callback to a kernel thread.
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:11:55 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171002170642-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171002115035.7sph6ul6hsszdwa4@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 01:50:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 02-10-17 20:33:52, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [Hmm, I do not see the original patch which this has been a reply to]
> > 
> > urbl.hostedemail.com and b.barracudacentral.org blocked my IP address,
> > and the rest are "Recipient address rejected: Greylisted" or
> > "Deferred: 451-4.3.0 Multiple destination domains per transaction is unsupported.",
> > and after all dropped at the servers. Sad...
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Mon 02-10-17 06:59:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 02:44:34PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > > Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > > > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 07:27:19PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I noticed that virtio_balloon is using register_oom_notifier() and
> > > > > > > > leak_balloon() from virtballoon_oom_notify() might depend on
> > > > > > > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM memory allocation.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > In leak_balloon(), mutex_lock(&vb->balloon_lock) is called in order to
> > > > > > > > serialize against fill_balloon(). But in fill_balloon(),
> > > > > > > > alloc_page(GFP_HIGHUSER[_MOVABLE] | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NORETRY) is
> > > > > > > > called with vb->balloon_lock mutex held. Since GFP_HIGHUSER[_MOVABLE] implies
> > > > > > > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS, this allocation attempt might
> > > > > > > > depend on somebody else's __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | !__GFP_NORETRY memory
> > > > > > > > allocation. Such __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | !__GFP_NORETRY allocation can reach
> > > > > > > > __alloc_pages_may_oom() and hold oom_lock mutex and call out_of_memory().
> > > > > > > > And leak_balloon() is called by virtballoon_oom_notify() via
> > > > > > > > blocking_notifier_call_chain() callback when vb->balloon_lock mutex is already
> > > > > > > > held by fill_balloon(). As a result, despite __GFP_NORETRY is specified,
> > > > > > > > fill_balloon() can indirectly get stuck waiting for vb->balloon_lock mutex
> > > > > > > > at leak_balloon().
> > > 
> > > This is really nasty! And I would argue that this is an abuse of the oom
> > > notifier interface from the virtio code. OOM notifiers are an ugly hack
> > > on its own but all its users have to be really careful to not depend on
> > > any allocation request because that is a straight deadlock situation.
> > 
> > Please describe such warning at
> > "int register_oom_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)" definition.
> 
> Yes, we can and should do that. Although I would prefer to simply
> document this API as deprecated. Care to send a patch? I am quite busy
> with other stuff.
> 
> > > I do not think that making oom notifier API more complex is the way to
> > > go. Can we simply change the lock to try_lock?
> > 
> > Using mutex_trylock(&vb->balloon_lock) alone is not sufficient. Inside the
> > mutex, __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM && !__GFP_NORETRY allocation attempt is used
> > which will fail to make progress due to oom_lock already held. Therefore,
> > virtballoon_oom_notify() needs to guarantee that all allocation attempts use
> > GFP_NOWAIT when called from virtballoon_oom_notify().
> 
> Ohh, I missed your point and thought the dependency is indirect

I do think this is the case. See below.


> and some
> other call path is allocating while holding the lock. But you seem to be
> right and
> leak_balloon
>   tell_host
>     virtqueue_add_outbuf
>       virtqueue_add
> 
> can do GFP_KERNEL allocation and this is clearly wrong. Nobody should
> try to allocate while we are in the OOM path. Michael, is there any way
> to drop this?

Yes - in practice it won't ever allocate - that path is never taken
with add_outbuf - it is for add_sgs only.

IMHO the issue is balloon inflation which needs to allocate
memory. It does it under a mutex, and oom handler tries to take the
same mutex.


> -- 
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2017-10-02 14:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <201709111927.IDD00574.tFVJHLOSOOMQFF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
     [not found] ` <20170929065654-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
     [not found]   ` <201709291344.FID60965.VHtMQFFJFSLOOO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
2017-10-01  5:44     ` [RFC] [PATCH] mm, oom: Offload OOM notify callback to a kernel thread Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-02  3:59       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-10-02  9:06         ` [RFC] [PATCH] mm,oom: " Michal Hocko
2017-10-02 11:33           ` [RFC] [PATCH] mm, oom: " Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-02 11:50             ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-02 14:11               ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2017-10-02 14:19                 ` Michal Hocko
2017-10-02 14:29                   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-10-02 14:31                     ` [RFC] [PATCH] mm,oom: " 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=20171002170642-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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