On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > David is trying to avoid setting MMF_OOM_SKIP when the OOM reaper found that > mm->users == 0. Yes, because MMF_OOM_SKIP enables the oom killer to select another process to kill and will do so without the original victim's mm being able to undergo exit_mmap(). So now we kill two or more processes when one would have sufficied; I have seen up to four processes killed unnecessarily without this patch. > But we must not wait forever because __mmput() might fail to > release some memory immediately. If __mmput() did not release some memory within > schedule_timeout_idle(HZ/10) * MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES sleep, let the OOM killer > invoke again. So, this is the case we want to address here, isn't it? > It is obviously a function of the number of threads that share the mm with the oom victim to determine how long would be a sensible amount of time to wait for __mmput() to even get a chance to be called, along with potentially allowing a non-zero number of those threads to allocate from memory reserves to allow them to eventually drop mm->mmap_sem to make forward progress. I have not witnessed any thread stalling in __mmput() that prevents the mm's memory to be freed. I have witnessed several processes oom killed unnecessarily for a single oom condition where before MMF_OOM_SKIP was introduced, a single oom kill would have sufficed. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
