On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:14:01PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/07/17 9:55, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> I don't get, why it's necessary to drop the cgroup oom killer to merge your fix? > >> I'm happy to help with rebasing and everything else. > > > > Yes, I wish you rebase your series on top of OOM lockup (CVE-2016-10723) mitigation > > patch ( https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=153112243424285&w=4 ). It is a trivial change > > and easy to cleanly backport (if applied before your series). > > > > Also, I expect you to check whether my cleanup patch which removes "abort" path > > ( [PATCH 1/2] at https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=153119509215026&w=4 ) helps > > simplifying your series. I don't know detailed behavior of your series, but I > > assume that your series do not kill threads which current thread should not wait > > for MMF_OOM_SKIP. > > syzbot is hitting WARN(1) due to mem_cgroup_out_of_memory() == false. > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__syzkaller.appspot.com_bug-3Fid-3Dea8c7912757d253537375e981b61749b2da69258&d=DwICJg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=i6WobKxbeG3slzHSIOxTVtYIJw7qjCE6S0spDTKL-J4&m=h9FJRAWtCmDLT-cVwvXKCYIUVRSrD--0XFJE-OnNY64&s=If6eFu6MlYjnfLXeg5_S-3tuhCZhSMv8_qfSrMfwOQ0&e= > > I can't tell what change is triggering this race. Maybe removal of oom_lock from > the oom reaper made more likely to hit. But anyway I suspect that > > static bool oom_kill_memcg_victim(struct oom_control *oc) > { > if (oc->chosen_memcg == NULL || oc->chosen_memcg == INFLIGHT_VICTIM) > return oc->chosen_memcg; // <= This line is still broken > > because > > /* We have one or more terminating processes at this point. */ > oc->chosen_task = INFLIGHT_VICTIM; > > is not called. > > Also, that patch is causing confusion by reviving schedule_timeout_killable(1) > with oom_lock held. > > Can we temporarily drop cgroup-aware OOM killer from linux-next.git and > apply my cleanup patch? Since the merge window is approaching, I really want to > see how next -rc1 would look like... Hi Tetsuo! Has this cleanup patch been acked by somebody? Which problem does it solve? Dropping patches for making a cleanup (if it's a cleanup) sounds a bit strange. Anyway, there is a good chance that current cgroup-aware OOM killer implementation will be replaced by a lightweight version (memory.oom.group). Please, take a look at it, probably your cleanup will not conflict with it at all. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
