From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, jani.nikula@linux.intel.com,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, airlied@linux.ie,
mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
rodrigo.vivi@intel.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] mm,oom: Offload OOM notify callback to a kernel thread.
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:11:55 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171002170642-mutt-send-email-mst__15250.9667365395$1506953554$gmane$org@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171002115035.7sph6ul6hsszdwa4@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 01:50:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 02-10-17 20:33:52, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [Hmm, I do not see the original patch which this has been a reply to]
> >
> > urbl.hostedemail.com and b.barracudacentral.org blocked my IP address,
> > and the rest are "Recipient address rejected: Greylisted" or
> > "Deferred: 451-4.3.0 Multiple destination domains per transaction is unsupported.",
> > and after all dropped at the servers. Sad...
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon 02-10-17 06:59:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 02:44:34PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > > Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > > > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 07:27:19PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I noticed that virtio_balloon is using register_oom_notifier() and
> > > > > > > > leak_balloon() from virtballoon_oom_notify() might depend on
> > > > > > > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM memory allocation.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In leak_balloon(), mutex_lock(&vb->balloon_lock) is called in order to
> > > > > > > > serialize against fill_balloon(). But in fill_balloon(),
> > > > > > > > alloc_page(GFP_HIGHUSER[_MOVABLE] | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NORETRY) is
> > > > > > > > called with vb->balloon_lock mutex held. Since GFP_HIGHUSER[_MOVABLE] implies
> > > > > > > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS, this allocation attempt might
> > > > > > > > depend on somebody else's __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | !__GFP_NORETRY memory
> > > > > > > > allocation. Such __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | !__GFP_NORETRY allocation can reach
> > > > > > > > __alloc_pages_may_oom() and hold oom_lock mutex and call out_of_memory().
> > > > > > > > And leak_balloon() is called by virtballoon_oom_notify() via
> > > > > > > > blocking_notifier_call_chain() callback when vb->balloon_lock mutex is already
> > > > > > > > held by fill_balloon(). As a result, despite __GFP_NORETRY is specified,
> > > > > > > > fill_balloon() can indirectly get stuck waiting for vb->balloon_lock mutex
> > > > > > > > at leak_balloon().
> > >
> > > This is really nasty! And I would argue that this is an abuse of the oom
> > > notifier interface from the virtio code. OOM notifiers are an ugly hack
> > > on its own but all its users have to be really careful to not depend on
> > > any allocation request because that is a straight deadlock situation.
> >
> > Please describe such warning at
> > "int register_oom_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)" definition.
>
> Yes, we can and should do that. Although I would prefer to simply
> document this API as deprecated. Care to send a patch? I am quite busy
> with other stuff.
>
> > > I do not think that making oom notifier API more complex is the way to
> > > go. Can we simply change the lock to try_lock?
> >
> > Using mutex_trylock(&vb->balloon_lock) alone is not sufficient. Inside the
> > mutex, __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM && !__GFP_NORETRY allocation attempt is used
> > which will fail to make progress due to oom_lock already held. Therefore,
> > virtballoon_oom_notify() needs to guarantee that all allocation attempts use
> > GFP_NOWAIT when called from virtballoon_oom_notify().
>
> Ohh, I missed your point and thought the dependency is indirect
I do think this is the case. See below.
> and some
> other call path is allocating while holding the lock. But you seem to be
> right and
> leak_balloon
> tell_host
> virtqueue_add_outbuf
> virtqueue_add
>
> can do GFP_KERNEL allocation and this is clearly wrong. Nobody should
> try to allocate while we are in the OOM path. Michael, is there any way
> to drop this?
Yes - in practice it won't ever allocate - that path is never taken
with add_outbuf - it is for add_sgs only.
IMHO the issue is balloon inflation which needs to allocate
memory. It does it under a mutex, and oom handler tries to take the
same mutex.
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-02 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-11 10:27 mm, virtio: possible OOM lockup at virtballoon_oom_notify() Tetsuo Handa
2017-09-29 4:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-09-29 4:44 ` Tetsuo Handa
[not found] ` <201709291344.FID60965.VHtMQFFJFSLOOO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
[not found] ` <201710011444.IBD05725.VJSFHOOMOFtLQF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
2017-10-02 3:59 ` [RFC] [PATCH] mm,oom: Offload OOM notify callback to a kernel thread Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <20171002065801-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
2017-10-02 9:06 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20171002090627.547gkmzvutrsamex@dhcp22.suse.cz>
[not found] ` <201710022033.GFE82801.HLOVOFFJtSFQMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
2017-10-02 11:50 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20171002115035.7sph6ul6hsszdwa4@dhcp22.suse.cz>
2017-10-02 14:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
[not found] ` <20171002170642-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
2017-10-02 14:19 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20171002141900.acmcbilwhqethfhq@dhcp22.suse.cz>
2017-10-02 14:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <20171002172349-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
2017-10-02 14:31 ` Michal Hocko
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='20171002170642-mutt-send-email-mst__15250.9667365395$1506953554$gmane$org@kernel.org' \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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).