From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: rientjes@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov@virtuozzo.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: Pass NULL memcg for oom_badness() check.
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:04:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160219140406.GF12690@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1455889898-5659-1-git-send-email-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
On Fri 19-02-16 22:51:38, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Currently, mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() is calling
> oom_scan_process_thread(&oc, task, totalpages) which includes
> a call to oom_unkillable_task(task, NULL, NULL) and then is
> calling oom_badness(task, memcg, NULL, totalpages) which includes
> a call to oom_unkillable_task(task, memcg, NULL).
>
> Since for_each_mem_cgroup_tree() iterates on only tasks from the given
> memcg hierarchy, there is no point with passing non-NULL memcg argument
> to oom_unkillable_task() via oom_badness().
>
> Replace memcg argument with NULL in order to save a call to
> task_in_mem_cgroup(task, memcg) in oom_unkillable_task()
> which is always true.
yes this is true but oom_badness is called from super slow path here so
I am not sure this change will buy anything. It makes the code little
bit more confusing because now you have to think twice (or git blame) to
see why the memcg == NULL is really OK.
So I do not think this is an improvement. If anything wouldn't it be
cleaner to remove memcg parameter from oom_badness altogether and
instead do the task_in_mem_cgroup check where it is really needed?
In other words do the check in oom_kill_process when evaluating children
to sacrifice them?
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index ae8b81c..3c96dd3 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1290,7 +1290,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> case OOM_SCAN_OK:
> break;
> };
> - points = oom_badness(task, memcg, NULL, totalpages);
> + points = oom_badness(task, NULL, NULL, totalpages);
> if (!points || points < chosen_points)
> continue;
> /* Prefer thread group leaders for display purposes */
> --
> 1.8.3.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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:[~2016-02-19 14:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-19 13:51 [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: Pass NULL memcg for oom_badness() check Tetsuo Handa
2016-02-19 14:04 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-02-19 14:36 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=20160219140406.GF12690@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vdavydov@virtuozzo.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).