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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom: remove PF_EXITING check completely
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:54:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100602155455.GB9622@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100602200732.F518.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On 06/02, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> Today, I've thought to make some bandaid patches for this issue. but
> yes, I've reached the same conclusion.
>
> If we think multithread and core dump situation, all fixes are just
> bandaid. We can't remove deadlock chance completely.
>
> The deadlock is certenaly worst result, then, minor PF_EXITING optimization
> doesn't have so much worth.
Agreed! I was always wondering if it really helps in practice.
> Subject: [PATCH] oom: remove PF_EXITING check completely
>
> PF_EXITING is wrong check if the task have multiple threads. This patch
> removes it.
>
> Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 27 ---------------------------
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 9e7f0f9..b06f8d1 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -302,24 +302,6 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned long *ppoints,
> if (test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE))
> return ERR_PTR(-1UL);
>
> - /*
> - * This is in the process of releasing memory so wait for it
> - * to finish before killing some other task by mistake.
> - *
> - * However, if p is the current task, we allow the 'kill' to
> - * go ahead if it is exiting: this will simply set TIF_MEMDIE,
> - * which will allow it to gain access to memory reserves in
> - * the process of exiting and releasing its resources.
> - * Otherwise we could get an easy OOM deadlock.
> - */
> - if ((p->flags & PF_EXITING) && p->mm) {
> - if (p != current)
> - return ERR_PTR(-1UL);
> -
> - chosen = p;
> - *ppoints = ULONG_MAX;
> - }
> -
> points = badness(p, uptime.tv_sec);
> if (points > *ppoints || !chosen) {
> chosen = p;
> @@ -436,15 +418,6 @@ static int oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *p, gfp_t gfp_mask, int order,
> if (printk_ratelimit())
> dump_header(p, gfp_mask, order, mem);
>
> - /*
> - * If the task is already exiting, don't alarm the sysadmin or kill
> - * its children or threads, just set TIF_MEMDIE so it can die quickly
> - */
> - if (p->flags & PF_EXITING) {
> - __oom_kill_process(p, mem, 0);
> - return 0;
> - }
> -
> printk(KERN_ERR "%s: kill process %d (%s) score %li or a child\n",
> message, task_pid_nr(p), p->comm, points);
>
> --
--
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:[~2010-06-02 15:56 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 [this message]
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
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=20100602155455.GB9622@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 \
/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).