At the present time, when showing potential OOM victims, we do not
exclude tasks which already have MMF_OOM_SKIP set; it is possible that
the last OOM killable victim was already OOM killed, yet the OOM
reaper failed to reclaim memory and set MMF_OOM_SKIP.
This can be confusing/or perhaps even misleading, to the reader of the
OOM report. Now, we already unconditionally display a task's
oom_score_adj_min value that can be set to OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN which is
indicative of an "unkillable" task i.e. is not eligible.
This patch provides a clear indication with regard to the OOM
eligibility of each displayed task.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <[email protected]>
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index eefd3f5fde46..70781d681a6e 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -160,6 +160,27 @@ static inline bool is_sysrq_oom(struct oom_control *oc)
return oc->order == -1;
}
+/**
+ * is_task_eligible_oom - determine if and why a task cannot be OOM killed
+ * @tsk: task to check
+ *
+ * Needs to be called with task_lock().
+ */
+static const char * is_task_oom_eligible(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ long adj;
+
+ adj = (long)p->signal->oom_score_adj;
+ if (adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN)
+ return "no: oom score";
+ else if (test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &p->mm->flags)
+ return "no: oom reaped";
+ else if (in_vfork(p))
+ return "no: in vfork";
+ else
+ return "yes";
+}
+
/* return true if the task is not adequate as candidate victim task. */
static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
{
@@ -401,12 +422,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
return 0;
}
- pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %s\n",
+ pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %-15s %s\n",
task->pid, from_kuid(&init_user_ns, task_uid(task)),
task->tgid, task->mm->total_vm, get_mm_rss(task->mm),
mm_pgtables_bytes(task->mm),
get_mm_counter(task->mm, MM_SWAPENTS),
- task->signal->oom_score_adj, task->comm);
+ task->signal->oom_score_adj, is_task_oom_eligible(task),
+ task->comm);
task_unlock(task);
return 0;
@@ -420,12 +442,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
* memcg, not in the same cpuset, or bound to a disjoint set of mempolicy nodes
* are not shown.
* State information includes task's pid, uid, tgid, vm size, rss,
- * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, and name.
+ * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, oom eligible status
+ * and name.
*/
static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc)
{
pr_info("Tasks state (memory values in pages):\n");
- pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj name\n");
+ pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj oom eligible? name\n");
if (is_memcg_oom(oc))
mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, dump_task, oc);
--
2.26.3
On 6/11/21 1:19 PM, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> At the present time, when showing potential OOM victims, we do not
> exclude tasks which already have MMF_OOM_SKIP set; it is possible that
> the last OOM killable victim was already OOM killed, yet the OOM
> reaper failed to reclaim memory and set MMF_OOM_SKIP.
> This can be confusing/or perhaps even misleading, to the reader of the
> OOM report. Now, we already unconditionally display a task's
> oom_score_adj_min value that can be set to OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN which is
> indicative of an "unkillable" task i.e. is not eligible.
>
> This patch provides a clear indication with regard to the OOM
> eligibility of each displayed task.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <[email protected]>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index eefd3f5fde46..70781d681a6e 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -160,6 +160,27 @@ static inline bool is_sysrq_oom(struct oom_control *oc)
> return oc->order == -1;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * is_task_eligible_oom - determine if and why a task cannot be OOM killed
> + * @tsk: task to check
> + *
> + * Needs to be called with task_lock().
> + */
> +static const char * is_task_oom_eligible(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + long adj;
> +
> + adj = (long)p->signal->oom_score_adj;
> + if (adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN)
> + return "no: oom score";
> + else if (test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &p->mm->flags)
> + return "no: oom reaped";
> + else if (in_vfork(p))
> + return "no: in vfork";
> + else
> + return "yes";
> +}
> +
> /* return true if the task is not adequate as candidate victim task. */
> static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
> {
> @@ -401,12 +422,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
> return 0;
> }
>
> - pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %s\n",
> + pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %-15s %s\n",
> task->pid, from_kuid(&init_user_ns, task_uid(task)),
> task->tgid, task->mm->total_vm, get_mm_rss(task->mm),
> mm_pgtables_bytes(task->mm),
> get_mm_counter(task->mm, MM_SWAPENTS),
> - task->signal->oom_score_adj, task->comm);
> + task->signal->oom_score_adj, is_task_oom_eligible(task),
> + task->comm);
> task_unlock(task);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -420,12 +442,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
> * memcg, not in the same cpuset, or bound to a disjoint set of mempolicy nodes
> * are not shown.
> * State information includes task's pid, uid, tgid, vm size, rss,
> - * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, and name.
> + * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, oom eligible status
> + * and name.
> */
> static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc)
> {
> pr_info("Tasks state (memory values in pages):\n");
> - pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj name\n");
> + pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj oom eligible? name\n");
A minor nit:
"oom eligible?" has 13 characters. The field width is 15. Maybe you
should pad 2 more spaces to make the proper alignment.
Cheers,
Longman
On 2021/06/12 2:42, Waiman Long wrote:
> A minor nit:
>
> "oom eligible?" has 13 characters. The field width is 15. Maybe you should pad 2 more spaces to make the proper alignment.
Maybe single character (e.g. 'S' for OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN, 'R' for MMF_OOM_SKIP, 'V' for in_vfork(),
none for eligible) is better because dump_task() might print many hundreds of lines?
On 2021/6/12 01:19, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> At the present time, when showing potential OOM victims, we do not
> exclude tasks which already have MMF_OOM_SKIP set; it is possible that
> the last OOM killable victim was already OOM killed, yet the OOM
> reaper failed to reclaim memory and set MMF_OOM_SKIP.
> This can be confusing/or perhaps even misleading, to the reader of the
> OOM report. Now, we already unconditionally display a task's
> oom_score_adj_min value that can be set to OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN which is
> indicative of an "unkillable" task i.e. is not eligible.
>
> This patch provides a clear indication with regard to the OOM
> eligibility of each displayed task.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <[email protected]>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index eefd3f5fde46..70781d681a6e 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -160,6 +160,27 @@ static inline bool is_sysrq_oom(struct oom_control *oc)
> return oc->order == -1;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * is_task_eligible_oom - determine if and why a task cannot be OOM killed
> + * @tsk: task to check
> + *
> + * Needs to be called with task_lock().
> + */
> +static const char * is_task_oom_eligible(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + long adj;
> +
> + adj = (long)p->signal->oom_score_adj;
accoring to the origin type, adj this place maybe use *short* instead.
> + if (adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN)
> + return "no: oom score";
> + else if (test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &p->mm->flags)
> + return "no: oom reaped";
> + else if (in_vfork(p))
> + return "no: in vfork";
> + else
> + return "yes";
> +}
> +
> /* return true if the task is not adequate as candidate victim task. */
> static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
> {
> @@ -401,12 +422,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
> return 0;
> }
>
> - pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %s\n",
> + pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %-15s %s\n",
> task->pid, from_kuid(&init_user_ns, task_uid(task)),
> task->tgid, task->mm->total_vm, get_mm_rss(task->mm),
> mm_pgtables_bytes(task->mm),
> get_mm_counter(task->mm, MM_SWAPENTS),
> - task->signal->oom_score_adj, task->comm);
> + task->signal->oom_score_adj, is_task_oom_eligible(task),
> + task->comm);
> task_unlock(task);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -420,12 +442,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
> * memcg, not in the same cpuset, or bound to a disjoint set of mempolicy nodes
> * are not shown.
> * State information includes task's pid, uid, tgid, vm size, rss,
> - * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, and name.
> + * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, oom eligible status
> + * and name.
> */
> static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc)
> {
> pr_info("Tasks state (memory values in pages):\n");
> - pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj name\n");
> + pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj oom eligible? name\n");
>
> if (is_memcg_oom(oc))
> mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(oc->memcg, dump_task, oc);