Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] oom: capture unreclaimable slab info in oom message

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

 



On Thu 28-09-17 13:36:57, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2017/09/28 6:46, Yang Shi wrote:
> > Changelog v7 —> v8:
> > * Adopted Michal’s suggestion to dump unreclaim slab info when unreclaimable slabs amount > total user memory. Not only in oom panic path.
> 
> Holding slab_mutex inside dump_unreclaimable_slab() was refrained since V2
> because there are
> 
> 	mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
> 	kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL);
> 	mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
> 
> users. If we call dump_unreclaimable_slab() for non OOM panic path, aren't we
> introducing a risk of crash (i.e. kernel panic) for regular OOM path?

yes we are
 
> We can try mutex_trylock() from dump_unreclaimable_slab() at best.
> But it is still remaining unsafe, isn't it?

using the trylock sounds like a reasonable compromise.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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>



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