Messages in this thread | | | From | Waiman Long <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/oom_kill: allow oom kill allocating task for non-global case | Date | Mon, 7 Jun 2021 15:18:38 -0400 |
| |
On 6/7/21 3:04 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 07-06-21 14:51:05, Waiman Long wrote: >> On 6/7/21 2:43 PM, Shakeel Butt wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 9:45 AM Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> On 6/7/21 12:31 PM, Aaron Tomlin wrote: >>>>> At the present time, in the context of memcg OOM, even when >>>>> sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task is enabled/or set, the "allocating" >>>>> task cannot be selected, as a target for the OOM killer. >>>>> >>>>> This patch removes the restriction entirely. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> mm/oom_kill.c | 6 +++--- >>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c >>>>> index eefd3f5fde46..3bae33e2d9c2 100644 >>>>> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c >>>>> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c >>>>> @@ -1089,9 +1089,9 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc) >>>>> oc->nodemask = NULL; >>>>> check_panic_on_oom(oc); >>>>> >>>>> - if (!is_memcg_oom(oc) && sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task && >>>>> - current->mm && !oom_unkillable_task(current) && >>>>> - oom_cpuset_eligible(current, oc) && >>>>> + if (sysctl_oom_kill_allocating_task && current->mm && >>>>> + !oom_unkillable_task(current) && >>>>> + oom_cpuset_eligible(current, oc) && >>>>> current->signal->oom_score_adj != OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN) { >>>>> get_task_struct(current); >>>>> oc->chosen = current; >>>> To provide more context for this patch, we are actually seeing that in a >>>> customer report about OOM happened in a container where the dominating >>>> task used up most of the memory and it happened to be the task that >>>> triggered the OOM with the result that no killable process could be >>>> found. >>> Why was there no killable process? What about the process allocating >>> the memory or is this remote memcg charging? >> It is because the other processes have a oom_adjust_score of -1000. So they >> are non-killable. Anyway, they don't consume that much memory and killing >> them won't free up that much. >> >> The other process that uses most of the memory is the one that trigger the >> OOM kill in the first place because the memory limit has been reached in new >> memory allocation. Based on the current logic, this process cannot be killed >> at all even if we set the oom_kill_allocating_task to 1 if the OOM happens >> only within the memcg context, not in a global OOM situation. This patch is >> to allow this process to be killed under this circumstance. > Do you have the oom report? I do not see why the allocating task hasn't > been chosen.
A partial OOM report below:
[ 8221.433608] memory: usage 21280kB, limit 204800kB, failcnt 49116 : [ 8227.239769] [ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj name [ 8227.242495] [1611298] 0 1611298 35869 635 167936 0 -1000 conmon [ 8227.242518] [1702509] 0 1702509 35869 701 176128 0 -1000 conmon [ 8227.242522] [1703345] 1001050000 1703294 183440 0 2125824 0 999 node [ 8227.242706] Out of memory and no killable processes... [ 8227.242731] node invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x6000c0(GFP_KERNEL), nodemask=(null), order=0, oom_score_adj=999 [ 8227.242732] node cpuset=crio-b8ac7e23f7b520c0365461defb66738231918243586e287bfb9e206bb3a0227a.scope mems_allowed=0-1
So in this case, node cannot kill itself and no other processes are available to be killed.
Cheers, Longman
| |