From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz, rientjes@google.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix oom work when memory is under pressure
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:13:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57D8F8AE.1090404@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160913132854.GB6592@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2016/9/13 21:28, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 13-09-16 21:13:21, zhong jiang wrote:
>> On 2016/9/13 1:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> If you want to solve this problem properly then you would have to give
>>> tasks which are looping in the page allocator access to some portion of
>>> memory reserves. This is quite tricky to do right, though.
>> To use some portion of memory reserves is almost no effect in a so
>> starvation scenario. I think the hungtask still will occur. it can
>> not solve the problem primarily.
> Granting an access to memory reserves is of course no full solution but
> it raises chances for a forward progress. Other solutions would have to
> guarantee that the memory reclaimed on behalf of the requester will be
> given to the requester. Not an easy task
>
>>> Retry counters with the fail path have been proposed in the past and not
>>> accepted.
>> The above patch have been tested by runing the trinity. The question
>> is fixed. Is there any reasonable reason oppose to the patch ? or it
>> will bring in any side-effect.
> Sure there is. Low order allocations have been traditionally non failing
> and changing that behavior is a major obstacle because it opens up a
> door to many bugs. I've tried to do something similar in the past and
> there was a strong resistance against it. Believe me been there done
> that...
>
hi, Michal
Recently, I hit the same issue when run a OOM case of the LTP and ksm enable.
[ 601.937145] Call trace:
[ 601.939600] [<ffffffc000086a88>] __switch_to+0x74/0x8c
[ 601.944760] [<ffffffc000a1bae0>] __schedule+0x23c/0x7bc
[ 601.950007] [<ffffffc000a1c09c>] schedule+0x3c/0x94
[ 601.954907] [<ffffffc000a1eb84>] rwsem_down_write_failed+0x214/0x350
[ 601.961289] [<ffffffc000a1e32c>] down_write+0x64/0x80
[ 601.966363] [<ffffffc00021f794>] __ksm_exit+0x90/0x19c
[ 601.971523] [<ffffffc0000be650>] mmput+0x118/0x11c
[ 601.976335] [<ffffffc0000c3ec4>] do_exit+0x2dc/0xa74
[ 601.981321] [<ffffffc0000c46f8>] do_group_exit+0x4c/0xe4
[ 601.986656] [<ffffffc0000d0f34>] get_signal+0x444/0x5e0
[ 601.991904] [<ffffffc000089fcc>] do_signal+0x1d8/0x450
[ 601.997065] [<ffffffc00008a35c>] do_notify_resume+0x70/0x78
The root case is that ksmd hold the read lock. and the lock is not released.
scan_get_next_rmap_item
down_read
get_next_rmap_item
alloc_rmap_item #ksmd will loop permanently.
How do you see this kind of situation ? or let the issue alone.
Thanks
zhongjiang
--
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:[~2016-09-14 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-06 14:47 [PATCH] mm: fix oom work when memory is under pressure zhongjiang
2016-09-09 11:44 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-12 9:51 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-12 11:13 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-12 13:42 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-12 17:44 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-13 13:13 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-13 13:28 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-13 14:01 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-14 7:13 ` zhong jiang [this message]
2016-09-14 8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-14 8:50 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-14 9:05 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-14 8:52 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-14 9:25 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-14 11:29 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-09-14 13:52 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-18 6:00 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-09-18 6:13 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-09-19 4:44 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-19 7:15 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-16 22:13 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-09-17 15:56 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-18 4:04 ` zhong jiang
2016-09-18 14:42 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-19 17:27 ` Hugh Dickins
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=57D8F8AE.1090404@huawei.com \
--to=zhongjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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).