linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: zhongjinji@honor.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	rientjes@google.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, npache@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, dvhart@infradead.org,
	dave@stgolabs.net, andrealmeid@igalia.com,
	liam.howlett@oracle.com, liulu.liu@honor.com, feng.han@honor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 21:37:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aKIvd4ZCdWUEpBT_@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250814135555.17493-3-zhongjinji@honor.com>

On Thu 14-08-25 21:55:54, zhongjinji@honor.com wrote:
> From: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com>
> 
> The OOM reaper can quickly reap a process's memory when the system encounters
> OOM, helping the system recover. Without the OOM reaper, if a process frozen
> by cgroup v1 is OOM killed, the victims' memory cannot be freed, and the
> system stays in a poor state. Even if the process is not frozen by cgroup v1,
> reaping victims' memory is still meaningful, because having one more process
> working speeds up memory release.
> 
> When processes holding robust futexes are OOM killed but waiters on those
> futexes remain alive, the robust futexes might be reaped before
> futex_cleanup() runs. It would cause the waiters to block indefinitely.
> To prevent this issue, the OOM reaper's work is delayed by 2 seconds [1].
> The OOM reaper now rarely runs since many killed processes exit within 2
> seconds.
> 
> Because robust futex users are few, it is unreasonable to delay OOM reap for
> all victims. For processes that do not hold robust futexes, the OOM reaper
> should not be delayed and for processes holding robust futexes, the OOM
> reaper must still be delayed to prevent the waiters to block indefinitely [1].
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220414144042.677008-1-npache@redhat.com/T/#u [1]

What has happened to
https://lore.kernel.org/all/aJGiHyTXS_BqxoK2@tiehlicka/T/#u ?

Generally speaking it would be great to provide a link to previous
versions of the patchset. I do not see v3 in my inbox (which is quite
messy ATM so I might have easily missed it).
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-17 19:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-14 13:55 [PATCH v4 0/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes zhongjinji
2025-08-14 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] futex: Introduce function process_has_robust_futex() zhongjinji
2025-08-14 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes zhongjinji
2025-08-15 14:41   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-18 14:14     ` zhongjinji
2025-08-17 19:37   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2025-08-18 12:08     ` zhongjinji
2025-08-19 10:49       ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-20  2:53         ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-08-21 18:13           ` Michal Hocko
2025-08-21 19:45             ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-08-14 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] mm/oom_kill: Have the OOM reaper and exit_mmap() traverse the maple tree in opposite orders zhongjinji
2025-08-14 23:09   ` Andrew Morton
2025-08-15 16:32     ` zhongjinji
     [not found]     ` <1CAF2012-C9A4-44E1-BEB1-A1ECE0BC0C3E@gmail.com>
2025-08-15 17:53       ` gio
2025-08-15 14:29   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-15 15:01     ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-15 17:37     ` zhongjinji
2025-08-19 15:18     ` zhongjinji
2025-08-21  9:32       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-25 14:12         ` zhongjinji
2025-08-15 14:41   ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-08-15 16:05     ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-08-14 23:13 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] mm/oom_kill: Only delay OOM reaper for processes using robust futexes Andrew Morton
2025-08-15 17:06   ` zhongjinji

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=aKIvd4ZCdWUEpBT_@tiehlicka \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=feng.han@honor.com \
    --cc=liam.howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=liulu.liu@honor.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=zhongjinji@honor.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).