Re: [PATCH 1/2] memcg, oom: unmark under_oom after the oom killer is done

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

 




On 2023/9/25 15:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 22-09-23 07:05:28, Haifeng Xu wrote:
>> When application in userland receives oom notification from kernel
>> and reads the oom_control file, it's confusing that under_oom is 0
>> though the omm killer hasn't finished. The reason is that under_oom
>> is cleared before invoking mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(), so move the
>> action that unmark under_oom after completing oom handling. Therefore,
>> the value of under_oom won't mislead users.
> 
> I do not really remember why are we doing it this way but trying to track
> this down shows that we have been doing that since fb2a6fc56be6 ("mm:
> memcg: rework and document OOM waiting and wakeup"). So this is an
> established behavior for 10 years now. Do we really need to change it
> now? The interface is legacy and hopefully no new workloads are
> emerging.
> 
> I agree that the placement is surprising but I would rather not change
> that unless there is a very good reason for that. Do you have any actual
> workload which depends on the ordering? And if yes, how do you deal with
> timing when the consumer of the notification just gets woken up after
> mem_cgroup_out_of_memory completes?

yes, when the oom event is triggered, we check the under_oom every 10 seconds. If it
is cleared, then we create a new process with less memory allocation to avoid oom again.

> 
>> Signed-off-by: Haifeng Xu <haifeng.xu@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> index e8ca4bdcb03c..0b6ed63504ca 100644
>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> @@ -1970,8 +1970,8 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t mask, int order)
>>  	if (locked)
>>  		mem_cgroup_oom_notify(memcg);
>>  
>> -	mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(memcg);
>>  	ret = mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(memcg, mask, order);
>> +	mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(memcg);
>>  
>>  	if (locked)
>>  		mem_cgroup_oom_unlock(memcg);
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
> 



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux