On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 21:26 -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Recently due to a spike in connections per second memcached on 3
> separate boxes triggered the OOM killer from accept. At the time the
> OOM killer was triggered there was 4GB out of 36GB free in zone 1. The
> problem was that alloc_fdtable was allocating an order 3 page (32KiB) to
> hold a bitmap, and there was sufficient fragmentation that the largest
> page available was 8KiB.
>
> I find the logic that PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER can't fail pretty dubious
> but I do agree that order 3 allocations are very likely to succeed.
>
> There are always pathologies where order > 0 allocations can fail when
> there are copious amounts of free memory available. Using the pigeon
> hole principle it is easy to show that it requires 1 page more than 50%
> of the pages being free to guarantee an order 1 (8KiB) allocation will
> succeed, 1 page more than 75% of the pages being free to guarantee an
> order 2 (16KiB) allocation will succeed and 1 page more than 87.5% of
> the pages being free to guarantee an order 3 allocate will succeed.
>
> A server churning memory with a lot of small requests and replies like
> memcached is a common case that if anything can will skew the odds
> against large pages being available.
>
> Therefore let's not give external applications a practical way to kill
> linux server applications, and specify __GFP_NORETRY to the kmalloc in
> alloc_fdmem. Unless I am misreading the code and by the time the code
> reaches should_alloc_retry in __alloc_pages_slowpath (where
> __GFP_NORETRY becomes signification). We have already tried everything
> reasonable to allocate a page and the only thing left to do is wait. So
> not waiting and falling back to vmalloc immediately seems like the
> reasonable thing to do even if there wasn't a chance of triggering the
> OOM killer.
>
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/file.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c
> index 771578b33fb6..db25c2bdfe46 100644
> --- a/fs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/file.c
> @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ static void *alloc_fdmem(size_t size)
> * vmalloc() if the allocation size will be considered "large" by the VM.
> */
> if (size <= (PAGE_SIZE << PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)) {
> - void *data = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NOWARN);
> + void *data = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NORETRY);
> if (data != NULL)
> return data;
> }
Hi Eric
I wrote yesterday a similar patch adding __GFP_NORETRY in following
paths. I feel that alloc_fdmem() is only a part of the problem ;)
What do you think, should we merge our changes or have distinct
patches ?
diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
index 0c127dcdf6a8..5b6a9431b017 100644
--- a/net/core/sock.c
+++ b/net/core/sock.c
@@ -1775,7 +1775,9 @@ struct sk_buff *sock_alloc_send_pskb(struct sock *sk, unsigned long header_len,
while (order) {
if (npages >= 1 << order) {
page = alloc_pages(sk->sk_allocation |
- __GFP_COMP | __GFP_NOWARN,
+ __GFP_COMP |
+ __GFP_NOWARN |
+ __GFP_NORETRY,
order);
if (page)
goto fill_page;
@@ -1845,7 +1847,7 @@ bool skb_page_frag_refill(unsigned int sz, struct page_frag *pfrag, gfp_t prio)
gfp_t gfp = prio;
if (order)
- gfp |= __GFP_COMP | __GFP_NOWARN;
+ gfp |= __GFP_COMP | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY;
pfrag->page = alloc_pages(gfp, order);
if (likely(pfrag->page)) {
pfrag->offset = 0;
--
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>