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;
Date:   Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:57:10 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To:     Ami Fischman <fischman@google.com>
Cc:     Robert Kolchmeyer <rkolchmeyer@google.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: make a last minute check to prevent unnecessary
 memcg oom kills
Message-ID: <20200318095710.GG21362@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2003101454580.142656@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20200310221938.GF8447@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.2003101547090.177273@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <CAJc0_fwDAKUTcYd_rga+jjDEE2BT7Tp=ViWdtiUeswVLUqC9CQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHuR8a-PbmthrKYpY5-SM-MH39O39W2J1mXA48oy9nASmys0mg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHuR8a-PbmthrKYpY5-SM-MH39O39W2J1mXA48oy9nASmys0mg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue 17-03-20 12:00:45, Ami Fischman wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:26 AM Robert Kolchmeyer
> <rkolchmeyer@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 3:54 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Robert, could you elaborate on the user-visible effects of this issue that
> > > caused it to initially get reported?
> >
> > Ami (now cc'ed) knows more, but here is my understanding.
> 
> Robert's description of the mechanics we observed is accurate.
> 
> We discovered this regression in the oom-killer's behavior when
> attempting to upgrade our system. The fraction of the system that
> went unhealthy due to this issue was approximately equal to the
> _sum_ of all other causes of unhealth, which are many and varied,
> but each of which contribute only a small amount of
> unhealth. This issue forced a rollback to the previous kernel
> where we ~never see this behavior, returning our unhealth levels
> to the previous background levels.

Could you be more specific on the good vs. bad kernel versions? Because
I do not remember any oom changes that would affect the
time-to-check-time-to-kill race. The timing might be slightly different
in each kernel version of course.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs