Re: [PATCH 2/2] memcg: do not report racy no-eligible OOM tasks

Tetsuo Handa
2019-01-07T20:59:59Z

On 2019/01/07 23:38, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>
> Tetsuo has reported [1] that a single process group memcg might easily
> swamp the log with no-eligible oom victim reports due to race between
> the memcg charge and oom_reaper

This explanation is outdated. I reported that one memcg OOM killer can
kill all processes in that memcg. I expect the changelog to be updated.

>
> Thread 1 Thread2 oom_reaper
> try_charge try_charge
> mem_cgroup_out_of_memory
> mutex_lock(oom_lock)
> mem_cgroup_out_of_memory
> mutex_lock(oom_lock)
> out_of_memory
> select_bad_process
> oom_kill_process(current)
> wake_oom_reaper
> oom_reap_task
> MMF_OOM_SKIP->victim
> mutex_unlock(oom_lock)
> out_of_memory
> select_bad_process # no task
>
> If Thread1 didn't race it would bail out from try_charge and force the
> charge. We can achieve the same by checking tsk_is_oom_victim inside
> the oom_lock and therefore close the race.
>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/bb2074c0-34fe-8c2c-1c7d-db71338f1e7f@i-love.sakura.ne.jp
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index af7f18b32389..90eb2e2093e7 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1387,10 +1387,22 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> .gfp_mask = gfp_mask,
> .order = order,
> };
> - bool ret;
> + bool ret = true;
>
> mutex_lock(&oom_lock);

And because of "[PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: marks all killed tasks as oom
victims", mark_oom_victim() will be called on current thread even if
we used mutex_lock_killable(&oom_lock) here, like you said

mutex_lock_killable would take care of exiting task already. I would
then still prefer to check for mark_oom_victim because that is not racy
with the exit path clearing signals. I can update my patch to use
_killable lock variant if we are really going with the memcg specific
fix.

. If current thread is not yet killed by the OOM killer but can terminate
without invoking the OOM killer, using mutex_lock_killable(&oom_lock) here
saves some processes. What is the race you are referring by "racy with the
exit path clearing signals" ?

> +
> + /*
> + * multi-threaded tasks might race with oom_reaper and gain
> + * MMF_OOM_SKIP before reaching out_of_memory which can lead
> + * to out_of_memory failure if the task is the last one in
> + * memcg which would be a false possitive failure reported
> + */

Not only out_of_memory() failure. Current thread needlessly tries to
select next OOM victim. out_of_memory() failure is nothing but a result
of no eligible candidate case.

> + if (tsk_is_oom_victim(current))
> + goto unlock;
> +
> ret = out_of_memory(&oc);
> +
> +unlock:
> mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
> return ret;
> }
>