From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz, mhocko@suse.com,
willy@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] mm/page_alloc: bail out on fatal signal during reclaim/compaction retry attempt
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 21:17:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210519201743.3260890-1-atomlin@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YKVn69o1UizH0kJD@casper.infradead.org>
It does not make sense to retry compaction when a fatal signal is
pending.
In the context of try_to_compact_pages(), indeed COMPACT_SKIPPED can be
returned; albeit, not every zone, on the zone list, would be considered
in the case a fatal signal is found to be pending.
Yet, in should_compact_retry(), given the last known compaction result,
each zone, on the zone list, can be considered/or checked
(see compaction_zonelist_suitable()). For example, if a zone was found
to succeed, then reclaim/compaction would be tried again
(notwithstanding the above).
This patch ensures that compaction is not needlessly retried
irrespective of the last known compaction result e.g. if it was skipped,
in the unlikely case a fatal signal is found pending.
So, OOM is at least attempted.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index aaa1655cf682..b317057ac186 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4252,6 +4252,9 @@ should_compact_retry(struct alloc_context *ac, int order, int alloc_flags,
if (!order)
return false;
+ if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
+ return false;
+
if (compaction_made_progress(compact_result))
(*compaction_retries)++;
--
2.26.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-19 20:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-19 19:23 [PATCH v2] mm/page_alloc: bail out on fatal signal during reclaim/compaction retry attempt Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-19 19:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-19 19:48 ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-19 20:17 ` Aaron Tomlin [this message]
2021-05-20 4:34 ` [PATCH v3] " Andrew Morton
2021-05-20 10:20 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-05-20 11:42 ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-20 11:56 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-20 13:30 ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-20 14:29 ` [PATCH v4] " Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-28 12:53 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-05-31 11:33 ` Michal Hocko
2021-05-31 11:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-05-31 13:21 ` Michal Hocko
2021-05-20 11:09 ` [PATCH v3] " Matthew Wilcox
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=20210519201743.3260890-1-atomlin@redhat.com \
--to=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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).