From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
anfei <anfei.zhou@gmail.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] proc: don't take ->siglock for /proc/pid/oom_adj
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 17:37:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100401153756.GD14603@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1004010128050.6285@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On 04/01, David Rientjes wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > > That doesn't work for depraceted_mode (sic), you'd need to test for
> > > OOM_ADJUST_MIN and OOM_ADJUST_MAX in that case.
> >
> > Yes, probably "if (depraceted_mode)" should do more checks, I didn't try
> > to verify that MIN/MAX are correctly converted. I showed this code to explain
> > what I mean.
> >
>
> Ok, please cc me on the patch, it will be good to get rid of the duplicate
> code and remove oom_adj from struct signal_struct.
OK, great, will do tomorrow.
> Do we need ->siglock? Why can't we just do
>
> struct sighand_struct *sighand;
> struct signal_struct *sig;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> sighand = rcu_dereference(task->sighand);
> if (!sighand) {
> rcu_read_unlock();
> return;
> }
> sig = task->signal;
>
> ... load/store to sig ...
>
> rcu_read_unlock();
No.
Before signals-make-task_struct-signal-immutable-refcountable.patch (actually,
series of patches), this can't work. ->signal is not protected by rcu, and
->sighand != NULL doesn't mean ->signal != NULL.
(yes, thread_group_cputime() is wrong too, but currently it is never called
lockless).
After signals-make-task_struct-signal-immutable-refcountable.patch, we do not
need any checks at all, it is always safe to use ->signal.
But. Unless we kill signal->oom_adj, we have another reason for ->siglock,
we can't update both oom_adj and oom_score_adj atomically, and if we race
with another thread they can be inconsistent wrt each other. Yes, oom_adj
is not actually used, except we report it back to user-space, but still.
So, I am going to send 2 patches. The first one factors out the code
in base.c and kills signal->oom_adj, the next one removes ->siglock.
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 115+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-24 16:25 [PATCH] oom killer: break from infinite loop Anfei Zhou
2010-03-25 2:51 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-26 22:08 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-26 22:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-28 14:55 ` anfei
2010-03-28 16:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-28 21:21 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-29 11:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-29 20:49 ` [patch] oom: give current access to memory reserves if it has been killed David Rientjes
2010-03-30 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-30 20:26 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 17:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 20:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 8:35 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 8:57 ` [patch -mm] oom: hold tasklist_lock when dumping tasks David Rientjes
2010-04-01 14:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 19:16 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 13:59 ` [patch] oom: give current access to memory reserves if it has been killed Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 19:12 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-02 11:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 18:30 ` [PATCH -mm 0/4] oom: linux has threads Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 18:31 ` [PATCH -mm 1/4] oom: select_bad_process: check PF_KTHREAD instead of !mm to skip kthreads Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 19:05 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-02 18:32 ` [PATCH -mm 2/4] oom: select_bad_process: PF_EXITING check should take ->mm into account Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-06 11:42 ` anfei
2010-04-06 12:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-06 13:05 ` anfei
2010-04-06 13:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 18:32 ` [PATCH -mm 3/4] oom: introduce find_lock_task_mm() to fix !mm false positives Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 18:33 ` [PATCH -mm 4/4] oom: oom_forkbomb_penalty: move thread_group_cputime() out of task_lock() Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 19:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-05 14:23 ` [PATCH -mm] oom: select_bad_process: never choose tasks with badness == 0 Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 19:02 ` [patch] oom: give current access to memory reserves if it has been killed David Rientjes
2010-04-02 19:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 19:46 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-02 19:54 ` [patch -mm] oom: exclude tasks with badness score of 0 from being selected David Rientjes
2010-04-02 21:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-02 21:22 ` [patch -mm v2] " David Rientjes
2010-04-02 20:55 ` [patch] oom: give current access to memory reserves if it has been killed Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 21:07 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 22:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 23:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 23:48 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 14:39 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 18:58 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 8:25 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 15:26 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-08 21:08 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-09 12:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-30 16:39 ` [PATCH] oom: fix the unsafe proc_oom_score()->badness() call Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-30 17:43 ` [PATCH -mm] proc: don't take ->siglock for /proc/pid/oom_adj Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-30 20:30 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 9:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 18:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 21:14 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 23:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 8:32 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 15:37 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-04-01 19:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-30 20:32 ` [PATCH] oom: fix the unsafe proc_oom_score()->badness() call David Rientjes
2010-03-31 9:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-31 20:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 7:41 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-01 13:13 ` [PATCH 0/1] oom: fix the unsafe usage of badness() in proc_oom_score() Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 13:13 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-01 19:03 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-29 14:06 ` [PATCH] oom killer: break from infinite loop anfei
2010-03-29 20:01 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-30 14:29 ` anfei
2010-03-30 20:29 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 0:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-31 6:07 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 6:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-31 6:30 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-31 6:31 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-31 7:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 6:32 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-31 7:08 ` [patch -mm] memcg: make oom killer a no-op when no killable task can be found David Rientjes
2010-03-31 7:08 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-31 8:04 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-31 10:38 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-04 23:28 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-05 21:30 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-05 22:40 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-05 22:49 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-05 23:01 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-06 12:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-06 21:47 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-07 0:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-07 13:29 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-08 18:05 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-21 19:17 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-21 22:04 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-22 0:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-22 8:34 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-27 22:58 ` [patch -mm] oom: reintroduce and deprecate oom_kill_allocating_task David Rientjes
2010-04-28 0:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-22 7:23 ` [patch -mm] memcg: make oom killer a no-op when no killable task can be found Nick Piggin
2010-04-22 7:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-22 10:09 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-22 10:27 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-22 21:11 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-22 10:28 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-22 15:39 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-22 21:09 ` David Rientjes
2010-05-04 23:55 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-08 17:36 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-02 10:17 ` [PATCH] oom killer: break from infinite loop Mel Gorman
2010-04-04 23:26 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-05 10:47 ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-06 22:40 ` David Rientjes
2010-03-29 11:31 ` anfei
2010-03-29 11:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-29 12:09 ` anfei
2010-03-28 2:46 ` David Rientjes
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=20100401153756.GD14603@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anfei.zhou@gmail.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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).