From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ast@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@kernel.org,
shakeel.butt@linux.dev, hannes@cmpxchg.org, andrii@kernel.org,
inwardvessel@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
martin.lau@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, memxor@gmail.com,
tj@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, eddyz87@gmail.com,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/23] mm: introduce bpf_out_of_memory() BPF kfunc
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 09:43:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87cy673rk7.fsf@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b04ce21d82f2118c291c49ace22d685bcbbd45d203b2f676556d3e5a90eebd1@mail.kernel.org> (bot's message of "Mon, 27 Oct 2025 23:57:21 +0000 (UTC)")
bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org writes:
> ```
> commit bce57b9b96e05731a14c7e10a364fdd9b733cda2
> Author: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
>
> mm: introduce bpf_out_of_memory() BPF kfunc
>
> This patch introduces bpf_out_of_memory() BPF kfunc to allow BPF programs
> to declare OOM events and trigger the kernel OOM handling mechanism. The
> function accepts a nullable memcg pointer for system-wide or memcg-scoped
> OOMs.
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
>> index 721087952..3cbdcd013 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/oom.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/oom.h
>> @@ -21,6 +21,11 @@ enum oom_constraint {
>> CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,
>> };
>>
>> +enum bpf_oom_flags {
>> + BPF_OOM_FLAGS_WAIT_ON_OOM_LOCK = 1 << 0,
>> + BPF_OOM_FLAGS_LAST = 1 << 1,
>> +};
>> +
>> /*
>> * Details of the page allocation that triggered the oom killer that are used to
>> * determine what should be killed.
>> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
>> index 3c86cd755..d7fca4bf5 100644
>> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
>> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> +/**
>> + * bpf_out_of_memory - declare Out Of Memory state and invoke OOM killer
>> + * @memcg__nullable: memcg or NULL for system-wide OOMs
>> + * @order: order of page which wasn't allocated
>> + * @flags: flags
>> + * @constraint_text__nullable: custom constraint description for the OOM report
>> + *
>> + * Declares the Out Of Memory state and invokes the OOM killer.
>> + *
>> + * OOM handlers are synchronized using the oom_lock mutex. If wait_on_oom_lock
>> + * is true, the function will wait on it. Otherwise it bails out with -EBUSY
>> + * if oom_lock is contended.
>> + *
>> + * Generally it's advised to pass wait_on_oom_lock=false for global OOMs
>> + * and wait_on_oom_lock=true for memcg-scoped OOMs.
>> + *
>> + * Returns 1 if the forward progress was achieved and some memory was freed.
>> + * Returns a negative value if an error occurred.
>> + */
>> +__bpf_kfunc int bpf_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg__nullable,
>> + int order, u64 flags)
>> +{
>> + struct oom_control oc = {
>> + .memcg = memcg__nullable,
>> + .order = order,
>> + };
>
> Can bpf_out_of_memory() work correctly for system-wide OOMs with
> uninitialized gfp_mask?
>
> Looking at out_of_memory():
>
> if (!(oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) && !is_memcg_oom(oc))
> return true;
>
> With gfp_mask=0 and memcg=NULL (system-wide OOM), this evaluates to:
> !(0 & __GFP_FS) && !false = true, causing an early return without
> invoking the OOM killer. The comment in out_of_memory() explains this
> check is about allocation context: "The OOM killer does not compensate
> for IO-less reclaim."
>
> All other callers of out_of_memory() initialize gfp_mask:
> - mm/page_alloc.c: .gfp_mask = gfp_mask
> - mm/memcontrol.c: .gfp_mask = gfp_mask
>
> For memcg OOMs, the code works because is_memcg_oom(oc) is true,
> bypassing the check. But for system-wide OOMs (NULL memcg), won't this
> cause the function to return immediately without killing any process?
This is a good catch! It must be .gfp_mask = GFP_KERNEL.
Fixed.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-28 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-27 23:21 [PATCH v2 11/23] mm: introduce BPF kfunc to access memory events Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 12/23] bpf: selftests: selftests for memcg stat kfuncs Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 13/23] mm: introduce bpf_out_of_memory() BPF kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 16:43 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2025-11-10 9:46 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-11 19:13 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-12 7:50 ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 14/23] mm: allow specifying custom oom constraint for BPF triggers Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 15:58 ` Chris Mason
2025-10-28 16:20 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 16:35 ` Chris Mason
2025-11-10 9:31 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-11 19:17 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-12 7:52 ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 15/23] mm: introduce bpf_task_is_oom_victim() kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:32 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 18:09 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 18:31 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-27 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 16/23] libbpf: introduce bpf_map__attach_struct_ops_opts() Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:07 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:24 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 17/23] bpf: selftests: introduce read_cgroup_file() helper Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 16:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 18/23] bpf: selftests: BPF OOM handler test Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 19/23] sched: psi: refactor psi_trigger_create() Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 20/23] sched: psi: implement bpf_psi struct ops Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:40 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 18:29 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 18:35 ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 19:54 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 21/23] sched: psi: implement bpf_psi_create_trigger() kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 22/23] bpf: selftests: add config for psi Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 23/23] bpf: selftests: PSI struct ops test Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:13 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:30 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-10 9:48 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-11 19:03 ` Roman Gushchin
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=87cy673rk7.fsf@linux.dev \
--to=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=inwardvessel@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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).