This process was moved to RT-priority  queue when global oom-killer
happened to boost the recovery
of the system.. but it wasn't get properily dealt with. I still have
no idea why where the problem is ..
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Balbir Singh [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Qiang Gao [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

information about the system is in the attach file "information.txt"

I can not reproduce it in the upstream 3.6.0 kernel..

On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Michal Hocko [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed 17-10-12 18:23:34, gaoqiang wrote:

quoted

I looked up nothing useful with google,so I'm here for help..

when this happens:  I use memcg to limit the memory use of a
process,and when the memcg cgroup was out of memory,
the process was oom-killed   however,it cannot really complete the
exiting. here is the some information

How many tasks are in the group and what kind of memory do they use?
Is it possible that you were hit by the same issue as described in
79dfdacc memcg: make oom_lock 0 and 1 based rather than counter.

quoted

OS version:  centos6.2    2.6.32.220.7.1

Your kernel is quite old and you should be probably asking your
distribution to help you out. There were many fixes since 2.6.32.
Are you able to reproduce the same issue with the current vanila kernel?

quoted

/proc/pid/stack
---------------------------------------------------------------

[<ffffffff810597ca>] __cond_resched+0x2a/0x40
[<ffffffff81121569>] unmap_vmas+0xb49/0xb70
[<ffffffff8112822e>] exit_mmap+0x7e/0x140
[<ffffffff8105b078>] mmput+0x58/0x110
[<ffffffff81061aad>] exit_mm+0x11d/0x160
[<ffffffff81061c9d>] do_exit+0x1ad/0x860
[<ffffffff81062391>] do_group_exit+0x41/0xb0
[<ffffffff81077cd8>] get_signal_to_deliver+0x1e8/0x430
[<ffffffff8100a4c4>] do_notify_resume+0xf4/0x8b0
[<ffffffff8100b281>] int_signal+0x12/0x17
[<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

This looks strange because this is just an exit part which shouldn't
deadlock or anything. Is this stack stable? Have you tried to take check
it more times?

Looking at information.txt, I found something interesting

rt_rq[0]:/1314
  .rt_nr_running                 : 1
  .rt_throttled                  : 1
  .rt_time                       : 0.856656
  .rt_runtime                    : 0.000000


cfs_rq[0]:/1314
  .exec_clock                    : 8738.133429
  .MIN_vruntime                  : 0.000001
  .min_vruntime                  : 8739.371271
  .max_vruntime                  : 0.000001
  .spread                        : 0.000000
  .spread0                       : -9792.255554
  .nr_spread_over                : 1
  .nr_running                    : 0
  .load                          : 0
  .load_avg                      : 7376.722880
  .load_period                   : 7.203830
  .load_contrib                  : 1023
  .load_tg                       : 1023
  .se->exec_start                : 282004.715064
  .se->vruntime                  : 18435.664560
  .se->sum_exec_runtime          : 8738.133429
  .se->wait_start                : 0.000000
  .se->sleep_start               : 0.000000
  .se->block_start               : 0.000000
  .se->sleep_max                 : 0.000000
  .se->block_max                 : 0.000000
  .se->exec_max                  : 77.977054
  .se->slice_max                 : 0.000000
  .se->wait_max                  : 2.664779
  .se->wait_sum                  : 29.970575
  .se->wait_count                : 102
  .se->load.weight               : 2

So 1314 is a real time process and

cpu.rt_period_us:
1000000
----------------------
cpu.rt_runtime_us:
0

When did tt move to being a Real Time process (hint: see nr_running
and nr_throttled)?

Balbir