From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hca@linux.ibm.com,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, david@kernel.org, brauner@kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
surenb@google.com, timmurray@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: process_mrelease: introduce PROCESS_MRELEASE_REAP_KILL flag
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:25:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <afHAi0E11D5sg_9y@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <afE2xchFRh2xARBn@google.com>
On Tue 28-04-26 15:37:57, Minchan Kim wrote:
[...]
> >From be4bd22a100ed6be2d1d2599ddb9da04043143eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 14:27:08 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: process_mrelease: introduce PROCESS_MRELEASE_REAP_KILL
> flag
>
> Currently, process_mrelease() requires userspace to send a SIGKILL signal
> prior to invocation. This separation introduces a scheduling race window
> where the victim task may receive the signal and enter the exit path
> before the reaper can invoke process_mrelease().
>
> When the victim enters the exit path (do_exit -> exit_mm), it clears its
> task->mm immediately. This causes process_mrelease() to fail with -ESRCH,
> leaving the actual address space teardown (exit_mmap) to be deferred until
> the mm's reference count drops to zero. In the field (e.g., Android),
> arbitrary reference counts (reading /proc/<pid>/cmdline, or various other
> remote VM accesses) frequently delay this teardown indefinitely,
> defeating the purpose of expedited reclamation.
>
> In Android's LMKD scenarios, this delay keeps memory pressure high, forcing
> the system to unnecessarily kill additional innocent background apps before
> the memory from the first victim is recovered.
>
> This patch introduces the PROCESS_MRELEASE_REAP_KILL UAPI flag to support
> an integrated auto-kill mode. When specified, process_mrelease() directly
> injects a SIGKILL into the target task after finding its mm.
>
> To solve the race condition, we grab the mm reference via mmgrab() before
> sending the SIGKILL. If the user passed PROCESS_MRELEASE_REAP_KILL, we assume
> it will free its memory and proceed with reaping, making the logic as simple
> as reap = reap_kill || task_will_free_mem(p).
>
> To handle shared address spaces safely in the auto-kill mode, we bail out
> immediately if the mm is marked with MMF_MULTIPROCESS when
> PROCESS_MRELEASE_REAP_KILL is specified. This protects existing users of
> process_mrelease() from behavior changes while preventing unsafe reaping of
> shared memory.
Please explain why this is a different behavior from the global oom
killer and how do you intend to deal with those mm shared process
groups. I am not saying this is a wrong behavior but it will be hard to
change once in place.
> Fundamentally, this allows process_mrelease() to trigger targeted memory
> reclaim (via oom_reaper infrastructure) quickly, even if the victim is
> not yet in the exit path, while reusing existing race handling between
> reaper and exit_mmap.
>
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Other than the above looks ok to me.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-29 8:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-21 23:02 [PATCH v1 0/3] mm: process_mrelease: expedite clean file folio reclaim and add auto-kill Minchan Kim
2026-04-21 23:02 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] mm: process_mrelease: expedite clean file folio reclaim via mmu_gather Minchan Kim
2026-04-24 7:56 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-24 21:24 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-27 9:29 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-27 22:04 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-24 19:33 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-04-24 21:56 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-21 23:02 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] mm: process_mrelease: skip LRU movement for exclusive file folios Minchan Kim
2026-04-22 7:22 ` Baolin Wang
2026-04-23 23:38 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-24 7:51 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-24 7:57 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-24 19:15 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-27 7:16 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-27 16:48 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-04-27 17:15 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-27 23:05 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-28 6:56 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-29 1:19 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-29 8:18 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-29 9:09 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-29 10:33 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-29 8:55 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-24 19:26 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-21 23:02 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: process_mrelease: introduce PROCESS_MRELEASE_REAP_KILL flag Minchan Kim
2026-04-24 7:57 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-24 22:49 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-27 7:02 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-27 22:03 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-28 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2026-04-28 22:37 ` Minchan Kim
2026-04-29 8:25 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2026-04-27 20:34 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-04-27 22:52 ` Minchan Kim
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=afHAi0E11D5sg_9y@tiehlicka \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=timmurray@google.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