Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [rfc patch] mm, oom: fix unnecessary killing of additional
 processes
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1805241422070.182300@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20180525072636.GE11881@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1805251227380.158701@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20180528081345.GD1517@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1805301357100.150424@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20180531063212.GF15278@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1805311400260.74563@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20180601074642.GW15278@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1806042100200.71129@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20180605085707.GV19202@dhcp22.suse.cz>
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <56138495-fd91-62f8-464a-db9960bfeb28@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jun 2018 22:20:49 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180605085707.GV19202@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2018/06/05 17:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> For this reason, we see testing harnesses often oom killed immediately 
>> after running a unittest that stresses reclaim or compaction by inducing a 
>> system-wide oom condition.  The harness spawns the unittest which spawns 
>> an antagonist memory hog that is intended to be oom killed.  When memory 
>> is mlocked or there are a large number of threads faulting memory for the 
>> antagonist, the unittest and the harness itself get oom killed because the 
>> oom reaper sets MMF_OOM_SKIP; this ends up happening a lot on powerpc.  
>> The memory hog has mm->mmap_sem readers queued ahead of a writer that is 
>> doing mmap() so the oom reaper can't grab the sem quickly enough.
> 
> How come the writer doesn't back off. mmap paths should be taking an
> exclusive mmap sem in killable sleep so it should back off. Or is the
> holder of the lock deep inside mmap path doing something else and not
> backing out with the exclusive lock held?
> 
 
Here is an example where the writer doesn't back off.

  http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180607150546.1c7db21f70221008e14b8bb8@linux-foundation.org

down_write_killable(&mm->mmap_sem) is nothing but increasing the possibility of
successfully back off. There is no guarantee that the owner of that exclusive
mmap sem will not be blocked by other unkillable waits.