Thread (11 messages) 11 messages, 4 authors, 2018-08-28

Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: OOM victims do not need to select next OOM victim unless __GFP_NOFAIL.

From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date: 2018-08-28 21:17:38

On 2018/08/28 22:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Tue 28-08-18 22:29:56, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[...]
quoted
The OOM reaper may set MMF_OOM_SKIP without reclaiming any memory (due
to e.g. mlock()ed memory, shared memory, unable to grab mmap_sem for read).
We haven't reached to the point where the OOM reaper reclaims all memory
nor allocating threads wait some more after setting MMF_OOM_SKIP.
Therefore, this

  if (tsk_is_oom_victim(current) && !(oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL))
      return true;

is the simplest mitigation we can do now.
But this is adding a mess because you pretend to make a forward progress
even the OOM path didn't do anything at all and rely on another kludge
elsewhere to work.
I'm not pretending to make a forward progress. If current thread is an OOM
victim, it is guaranteed to make forward progress (unless __GFP_NOFAIL) by
failing that allocation attempt after trying memory reserves. The OOM path
does not need to do anything at all.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help