linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, oss-security@lists.openwall.com,
	Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>,
	Kees Cook <kees.cook@canonical.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, pageexec@freemail.hu,
	Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>,
	Eugene Teo <eugene@redhat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] oom: don't ignore rss in nascent mm
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:44:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100916174433.GA4842@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100916145710.3BBA.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

On 09/16, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> ChangeLog
>  o since v1
>    - Always use thread group leader's ->in_exec_mm.

Confused ;)

> +static unsigned long oom_rss_swap_usage(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> +	struct task_struct *t = p;
> +	struct task_struct *leader = p->group_leader;
> +	unsigned long points = 0;
> +
> +	do {
> +		task_lock(t);
> +		if (t->mm) {
> +			points += get_mm_rss(t->mm);
> +			points += get_mm_counter(t->mm, MM_SWAPENTS);
> +			task_unlock(t);
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		task_unlock(t);
> +	} while_each_thread(p, t);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the process is in execve() processing, we have to concern
> +	 * about both old and new mm.
> +	 */
> +	task_lock(leader);
> +	if (leader->in_exec_mm) {
> +		points += get_mm_rss(leader->in_exec_mm);
> +		points += get_mm_counter(leader->in_exec_mm, MM_SWAPENTS);
> +	}
> +	task_unlock(leader);
> +
> +	return points;
> +}

This patch relies on fact that we can't race with de_thread() (and btw
the change in de_thread() looks bogus). Then why ->in_exec_mm lives in
task_struct ?

To me, this looks a bit strange. I think we should either do not use
->group_leader to hold ->in_exec_mm like your previous patch did, or
move ->in_exec_mm into signal_struct. The previous 3/4 ensures that
only one thread can set ->in_exec_mm.

And I don't think oom_rss_swap_usage() should replace find_lock_task_mm()
in oom_badness(), I mean something like this:

	static unsigned long oom_rss_swap_usage(struct mm_struct *mm)
	{
		return get_mm_rss(mm) + get_mm_counter(mm, MM_SWAPENTS);
	}

	unsigned int oom_badness(struct task_struct *p, ...)
	{
		int points = 0;

		if (unlikely(p->signal->in_exec_mm)) {
			task_lock(p->group_leader);
			if (p->signal->in_exec_mm)
				points = oom_rss_swap_usage(p->signal->in_exec_mm);
			task_unlock(p->group_leader);
		}

		p = find_lock_task_mm(p);
		if (!p)
			return points;

		...
	}

but this is the matter of taste.

What do you think?

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-16 17:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-16  5:52 [PATCH 0/4] oom fixes for 2.6.36 KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-16  5:55 ` [PATCH 1/4] oom: remove totalpage normalization from oom_badness() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-16  6:36   ` David Rientjes
2010-09-16  6:57     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-16  7:47       ` Pekka Enberg
2010-09-16  5:55 ` [PATCH 2/4] Revert "oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable" KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-16  5:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] move cred_guard_mutex from task_struct to signal_struct KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-16  5:57 ` [PATCH 4/4] oom: don't ignore rss in nascent mm KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-16 17:44   ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-09-27  2:50     ` KOSAKI Motohiro

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=20100916174433.GA4842@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=eugene@redhat.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kees.cook@canonical.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=oss-security@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=pageexec@freemail.hu \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=solar@openwall.com \
    --cc=spender@grsecurity.net \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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).