> On Aug 3, 2019, at 8:51 AM, Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Masoud, will you try this patch?
Gladly.
It looks like it is working (and OOMing properly).
>
> By the way, is /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/leaker/memory.usage_in_bytes remains non-zero
> despite /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/leaker/tasks became empty due to memcg OOM killer expected?
> Deleting big-data-file.bin after memcg OOM killer reduces some, but still remains
> non-zero.
Yes. I had not noticed that:
[ 1114.190477] oom_reaper: reaped process 1942 (leaker), now anon-rss:0kB, file-
rss:0kB, shmem-rss:0kB
./test-script.sh: line 16: 1942 Killed ./leaker -p 10240 -c 100000
[root@localhost laleaker]# cat /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/leaker/memory.usage_in_bytes
3194880
[root@localhost laleaker]# cat /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/leaker/memory.limit_in_bytes
536870912
[root@localhost laleaker]# rm -f big-data-file.bin
[root@localhost laleaker]# cat /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/leaker/memory.usage_in_bytes
2838528
Thanks!
Masoud
PS: Tried hand-back-porting it to 4.19-y and it didn’t work. I think there are other patches between 4.19.0 and 5.3 that could be necessary…
>
> ----------------------------------------
> From 2f92c70f390f42185c6e2abb8dda98b1b7d02fa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 00:41:30 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] memcg, oom: don't require __GFP_FS when invoking memcg OOM killer
>
> Masoud Sharbiani noticed that commit 29ef680ae7c21110 ("memcg, oom: move
> out_of_memory back to the charge path") broke memcg OOM called from
> __xfs_filemap_fault() path. It turned out that try_chage() is retrying
> forever without making forward progress because mem_cgroup_oom(GFP_NOFS)
> cannot invoke the OOM killer due to commit 3da88fb3bacfaa33 ("mm, oom:
> move GFP_NOFS check to out_of_memory"). Regarding memcg OOM, we need to
> bypass GFP_NOFS check in order to guarantee forward progress.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Masoud Sharbiani <msharbiani@xxxxxxxxx>
> Bisected-by: Masoud Sharbiani <msharbiani@xxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 29ef680ae7c21110 ("memcg, oom: move out_of_memory back to the charge path")
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index eda2e2a..26804ab 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -1068,9 +1068,10 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc)
> * The OOM killer does not compensate for IO-less reclaim.
> * pagefault_out_of_memory lost its gfp context so we have to
> * make sure exclude 0 mask - all other users should have at least
> - * ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM to get here.
> + * ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM to get here. But mem_cgroup_oom() has to
> + * invoke the OOM killer even if it is a GFP_NOFS allocation.
> */
> - if (oc->gfp_mask && !(oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
> + if (oc->gfp_mask && !(oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) && !is_memcg_oom(oc))
> return true;
>
> /*
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
>
