On 06/04, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 06/04, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> >
> > In multi threaded OOM case, we have two problematic routine, coredump
> > and vmscan. Roland's idea can only solve the former.
> >
> > But I also interest vmscan quickly exit if OOM received.
>
> Yes, agreed. See another email from me, MMF_ flags looks "obviously
> useful" to me.
Well. But somehow we forgot about the !coredumping case... Suppose
that select_bad_process() chooses the process P to kill and we have
other processes (not sub-threads) which share the same ->mm.
In that case I am not sure we should blindly set MMF_OOMKILL. Suppose
that we kill P and after that the "out-of-memory" condition goes away.
But its ->mm still has MMF_OOMKILL set, and it is used. Who/when will
clear this flag?
Perhaps something like below makes sense for now.
Oleg.
--- x/fs/exec.c
+++ x/fs/exec.c
@@ -1594,6 +1594,7 @@ static inline int zap_threads(struct tas
spin_lock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
if (!signal_group_exit(tsk->signal)) {
mm->core_state = core_state;
+ set_bit(MMF_COREDUMP, &mm->flags);
nr = zap_process(tsk, exit_code);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
--- x/fs/binfmt_elf.c
+++ x/fs/binfmt_elf.c
@@ -2028,6 +2028,9 @@ static int elf_core_dump(struct coredump
struct page *page;
int stop;
+ if (!test_bit(MMF_COREDUMP, ¤t->mm->flags))
+ goto end_coredump;
+
page = get_dump_page(addr);
if (page) {
void *kaddr = kmap(page);
--- x/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ x/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -414,6 +414,7 @@ static void __oom_kill_task(struct task_
p->rt.time_slice = HZ;
set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);
+ clear_bit(MMF_COREDUMP, &p->mm->flags);
force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
}
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>