lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] oom: do not live lock on frozen tasks
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:14:40 +0200
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote:

> On Mon 26-09-11 01:56:57, David Rientjes wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> > > index 626303b..b9774f3 100644
> > > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> > > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> > > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> > > #include <linux/mempolicy.h>
> > > #include <linux/security.h>
> > > #include <linux/ptrace.h>
> > > +#include <linux/freezer.h>
> > >
> > > int sysctl_panic_on_oom;
> > > int sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task;
> > > @@ -451,6 +452,9 @@ static int oom_kill_task(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem)
> > > task_pid_nr(q), q->comm);
> > > task_unlock(q);
> > > force_sig(SIGKILL, q);
> > > +
> > > + if (frozen(q))
> > > + thaw_process(q);
> > > }
> > >
> > > set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);
> >
> > This is in the wrong place, oom_kill_task() iterates over all threads that
> > are _not_ in the same thread group as the chosen thread and kills them
> > without giving them access to memory reserves. The chosen task, p, could
> > still be frozen and may not exit.
>
> Ahh, right you are. I ave missed that one. Updated patch bellow.
>
> >
> > Once that's fixed, feel free to add my
> >
> > Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
>
> Thanks
>
> >
> > once Rafael sends his acked-by or reviewed-by.
> ---
> From f935ed4558c2fb033ef5c14e02b28e12a615f80e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:23:15 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] oom: do not live lock on frozen tasks
>
> Konstantin Khlebnikov has reported (https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/23/45)
> that OOM can end up in a live lock if select_bad_process picks up a frozen
> task.
> Unfortunately we cannot mark such processes as unkillable to ignore them
> because we could panic the system even though there is a chance that
> somebody could thaw the process so we can make a forward process (e.g. a
> process from another cpuset or with a different nodemask).
>
> Let's thaw an OOM selected frozen process right after we've sent fatal
> signal from oom_kill_task.
> Thawing is safe if the frozen task doesn't access any suspended device
> (e.g. by ioctl) on the way out to the userspace where we handle the
> signal and die. Note, we are not interested in the kernel threads because
> they are not oom killable.
>
> Accessing suspended devices by a userspace processes shouldn't be an
> issue because devices are suspended only after userspace is already
> frozen and oom is disabled at that time.
>
> run_guest (drivers/lguest/core.c) calls try_to_freeze with an user
> context but it seems it is able to cope with signals because it
> explicitly checks for pending signals so we should be safe.
>
> Other than that userspace accesses the fridge only from the
> signal handling routines so we are able to handle SIGKILL without any
> negative side effects.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> Reported-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>

Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-26 11:29    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans