Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] mm: Add policy_name to identify OOM policies

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello,

在 2023/8/15 04:51, Jonathan Corbet 写道:
Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

This patch adds a new metadata policy_name in oom_control and report it
in dump_header(), so we can know what has been the selection policy. In
BPF program, we can call kfunc set_oom_policy_name to set the current
user-defined policy name. The in-kernel policy_name is "default".

Signed-off-by: Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  include/linux/oom.h |  7 +++++++
  mm/oom_kill.c       | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
  2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

So I have a possibly dumb question here...

diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
index 7d0c9c48a0c5..69d0f2ec6ea6 100644
--- a/include/linux/oom.h
+++ b/include/linux/oom.h
@@ -22,6 +22,10 @@ enum oom_constraint {
  	CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,
  };
+enum {
+	POLICY_NAME_LEN = 16,
+};

We've defined our name length, fine...

  /*
   * Details of the page allocation that triggered the oom killer that are used to
   * determine what should be killed.
@@ -52,6 +56,9 @@ struct oom_control {
/* Used to print the constraint info. */
  	enum oom_constraint constraint;
+
+	/* Used to report the policy info. */
+	char policy_name[POLICY_NAME_LEN];
  };

...that is the length of the array, appended to the structure...

  extern struct mutex oom_lock;
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 255c9ef1d808..3239dcdba4d7 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -443,6 +443,35 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
  	return 0;
  }
+__bpf_kfunc void set_oom_policy_name(struct oom_control *oc, const char *src, size_t sz)
+{
+	memset(oc->policy_name, 0, sizeof(oc->policy_name));
+
+	if (sz > POLICY_NAME_LEN)
+		sz = POLICY_NAME_LEN;
+
+	memcpy(oc->policy_name, src, sz);
+}

This truncates the name, possibly leaving it without a terminating NUL
character, right?


Yes, indeed. We should guarantee that the policy_name is terminated with a NULL character to avoid some undefined behavior.

Thanks for your helpful review.

------
Chuyi Zhou





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux