linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom: Make coredump interruptible
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:42:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100602154210.GA9622@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100602221805.F524.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

(add Roland)

On 06/02, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> > Otoh, if we make do_coredump() interruptible (and we should do this
> > in any case), then perhaps the TIF_MEMDIE+PF_COREDUMP is not really
> > needed? Afaics we always send SIGKILL along with TIF_MEMDIE.
>
> How is to make per-process oom flag + interruptible coredump?
>
> this per-process oom flag can be used vmscan shortcut exiting too.
> (IOW, It can help DavidR mmap_sem issue)

Firstly, this solution is not complete. We should make it really
interruptible (from user-space too), but we need more changes for
this (in particular we need to distinguish group-exit/exec cases
from the explicit SIGKILL case). Let's not discuss this here, this
is the different story.


But. I agree very much that it makes sense to add the quick fix
right now. Even if this fix will be superseded by the "proper"
fixes later.

> --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> @@ -2038,6 +2038,11 @@ static int elf_core_dump(struct coredump_params *cprm)
>  				page_cache_release(page);
>  			} else
>  				stop = !dump_seek(cprm->file, PAGE_SIZE);
> +
> +			/* Now, The process received OOM. Exit soon! */
> +			if (current->signal->oom_victim)
> +				stop = 1;

Agreed, most problems with memory allocations should come from this loop.

> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -544,6 +544,9 @@ struct signal_struct {
>  	int			notify_count;
>  	struct task_struct	*group_exit_task;
>
> +	/* true mean the process is OOM-killer victim. */
> +	bool			oom_victim;

Well, the new word in signal_struct is not nice. It is better to
set SIGNAL_OOM_XXX in ->signal->flags (this needs ->siglock).

But. I don't think that signal_struct is the right place for the marker.

The thread which actually dumps the core doesn't necessarily belong
to the same thread group, but it can share ->mm with the selected
oom victim.

IOW, we should mark ->mm instead (perhaps mm->flags) or mm->core_state.
This in turn means we need find_lock_task_mm().

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:[~2010-06-02 15:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-31  9:33 [PATCH 1/5] oom: select_bad_process: check PF_KTHREAD instead of !mm to skip kthreads KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-31  9:35 ` [PATCH 2/5] oom: select_bad_process: PF_EXITING check should take ->mm into account KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-31 16:43   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-01  1:10     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01 20:18       ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-02 13:54         ` [PATCH] oom: remove PF_EXITING check completely KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-02 15:54           ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-02 21:02             ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03  4:48               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-03  6:29                 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 13:54         ` [PATCH] oom: Make coredump interruptible KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-02 15:42           ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-06-02 17:29             ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-02 17:53               ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-02 18:58                 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-02 20:38                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-03 14:03                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-04 10:54                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-04 11:27                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-04 11:34                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-09 19:53                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-09 20:41                           ` David Rientjes
2010-06-09 21:03                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-13 11:24                           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 15:53                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-13 17:13                               ` uninterruptible CLONE_VFORK (Was: oom: Make coredump interruptible) Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-14  0:56                                 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-14 16:33                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-14 19:17                                     ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-28 17:33                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-28 18:04                                         ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-14  0:36                               ` [PATCH] oom: Make coredump interruptible Roland McGrath
2010-06-14  0:26                     ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-01 20:39   ` [PATCH 2/5] oom: select_bad_process: PF_EXITING check should take ->mm into account David Rientjes
2010-05-31  9:36 ` [PATCH 3/5] oom: introduce find_lock_task_mm() to fix !mm false positives KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01  0:57   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-01 20:42   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 16:05   ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-31  9:37 ` [PATCH 4/5] oom: the points calculation of child processes must use find_lock_task_mm() too KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-31 16:56   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-05-31 23:48     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-31  9:38 ` [PATCH 5/5] oom: __oom_kill_task() " KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-01  1:02   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-01 20:44   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01  0:54 ` [PATCH 1/5] oom: select_bad_process: check PF_KTHREAD instead of !mm to skip kthreads KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-01 20:36 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-01 21:20   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-01 21:26     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 13:54       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-02 21:09         ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 21:33           ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-02 21:46             ` David Rientjes
2010-06-03 14:27               ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-03 20:11                 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-02 15:32 ` Minchan Kim

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=20100602154210.GA9622@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=roland@redhat.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).