Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:c604:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y4csp842111pxt; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:04:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwMRa5TzPtB/BjbjX6r0QTvqQlOsHSpMjvEiNRoc3HgZakTNC+nmdSjqwCuqbrJtXOIAwt9 X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1c01:: with SMTP id nc1mr6388185ejc.504.1628193891426; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 13:04:51 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1628193891; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=jGEzP/h5cpe4QkOoVjmIbh5jFl7+7zZwpmDbFz6gKgPBJ79PKQUYU1zrTybzb1NQb0 JQm+o22B/ftJ0xw2IDq23THz1+/puojqH0M37LlRr8LvoA8s7nGTQFebgecFzAMfwsWQ 4/vaj0uIyHdOl1OquFjpbmTEQMfd9zv/LMDzA9cleI9Hb4Pc/aspOxybW4Honmekguhc +Nzm34K2hUrwj1jTvzs3Qb2vIOO2TTC+ltnL3aBPuJeWjpu/ZjnJWbWcsGjNdodLBqXO 3dieXuWKfnRSWsZppzSQo48hypuXimmUhyylphLABpzygxxCZqgw/hgetIR9i8MfWjk4 amkw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=yqacVN1P35gjf+Hv6b4yKOzwapLRJIsHBIZJMQqhKzI=; b=F9LB4POfQ2P8nSVbHXScWOVwqMz71HE35yznZ85Q9n3pnkW7gO8gKRV4ithInSetSA PWIwZjIBsnO0cUXSdux/bVFO38Xo9fWFwlB0qPefbyazG1Lz7829JzSrglqw4Olh4gXH 6CESJ0bnCx/0DMP97RrLvnXpArv9R5b1zDk4s/mLnaHDFzgvce6YYEGUc1g/CbettxqX TlFbs8nyxFYaK9tRQZKkfV8OwcqiIlz8efet8eY8jOxhO2L6BdGn47gM7B81+ZjAZtP6 oW7PXF0C8YAak4dqnRcKcvRovq1y6nzoHZ33Hprp9z3iBha9GmjEEYUb/LBvMhEZERiZ FF4w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=hKkTa+B6; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id di27si1657991edb.169.2021.08.05.13.04.27; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 13:04:51 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=hKkTa+B6; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240842AbhHER4a (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:56:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33968 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240806AbhHER43 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:56:29 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE9B7C061765 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 10:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id m18so8234218ljo.1 for ; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 10:56:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yqacVN1P35gjf+Hv6b4yKOzwapLRJIsHBIZJMQqhKzI=; b=hKkTa+B6NFN8bAZM9KyETBC57BuR4A6rz32sx2u47neH6jV7bZoa8HjAQkynyOIhBp unylhegz4jsLGJL/eQ7qtYPyT8L6kCl8uZaqXRYPCDanL5lvZAX/XjnnqUubwp4UaAb6 uiOpo2AuVwurU2o3yymg2/kvyuQkqEvTA5czQaKCXSWvc03QICxQdPogNd1EBQ4d4fxt xQVhwgkJKSEEAqsHzQKGl+xCSkGEhSNiqbv2KFZEOND2317WJHotNQKPvRQ1zLtfhgu6 C6q/fBNhU/NEV/3kgippxxx9Ux0iPhVkkfeESJLA0cxeVtcMfcbHkBs3iQMR0nUpUfDX 9J8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=yqacVN1P35gjf+Hv6b4yKOzwapLRJIsHBIZJMQqhKzI=; b=KsSv7HYqta2t+qT59lKkuScDQ6ddruNe8fBZfaYT1S+5Ois3dYoUUCYW1i5MJ19j6W ViHl/5xn3wS6hJkFAadeZfFAFXCHyChSywLOBMxWZG4I2J9n2XAs0V9aAvcBxJRqfybt oXl9kSSKuRrnWyG/J343OBboSVEvKDkUCcBngtH5Ai0npL/ShE60ixSL8ozKzN86D4P9 Gz+Pnk55MvM+uyp1S+uThD9Jr48DKbZkvDFELQAMu5W886ad8/AeAL0aQ8MzdX6lX+S4 lW2XX1WWLiseTU7MK4N2q+Gzky1w+IDQf2Aa55QneWJyJ0Kwgoyy/l1OGSh10YeYBWTg wZfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533IcWJe31d/k2RwL2bdRld4eLxbAbauw69gMrzkesRqJXF3uBIp dgU3XCUKwyf1o1oWmhe41X5eAvK23E1CIGoY+3wRoA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:906:: with SMTP id e6mr3820965ljq.160.1628186172759; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 10:56:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210805170859.2389276-1-surenb@google.com> <46998d10-d0ca-aeeb-8dcd-41b8130fb756@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Shakeel Butt Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 10:56:01 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] mm: introduce process_mrelease system call To: Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: David Hildenbrand , Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Michal Hocko , David Rientjes , Matthew Wilcox , Johannes Weiner , Roman Gushchin , Rik van Riel , Minchan Kim , Christian Brauner , Christoph Hellwig , Oleg Nesterov , Jann Horn , Andy Lutomirski , Christian Brauner , Florian Weimer , Jan Engelhardt , Tim Murray , Linux API , linux-mm , LKML , kernel-team Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 10:50 AM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 10:29 AM David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > > On 05.08.21 19:08, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > In modern systems it's not unusual to have a system component monitoring > > > memory conditions of the system and tasked with keeping system memory > > > pressure under control. One way to accomplish that is to kill > > > non-essential processes to free up memory for more important ones. > > > Examples of this are Facebook's OOM killer daemon called oomd and > > > Android's low memory killer daemon called lmkd. > > > For such system component it's important to be able to free memory > > > quickly and efficiently. Unfortunately the time process takes to free > > > up its memory after receiving a SIGKILL might vary based on the state > > > of the process (uninterruptible sleep), size and OPP level of the core > > > the process is running. A mechanism to free resources of the target > > > process in a more predictable way would improve system's ability to > > > control its memory pressure. > > > Introduce process_mrelease system call that releases memory of a dying > > > process from the context of the caller. This way the memory is freed in > > > a more controllable way with CPU affinity and priority of the caller. > > > The workload of freeing the memory will also be charged to the caller. > > > The operation is allowed only on a dying process. > > > > > > After previous discussions [1, 2, 3] the decision was made [4] to introduce > > > a dedicated system call to cover this use case. > > > > > > The API is as follows, > > > > > > int process_mrelease(int pidfd, unsigned int flags); > > > > > > DESCRIPTION > > > The process_mrelease() system call is used to free the memory of > > > an exiting process. > > > > > > The pidfd selects the process referred to by the PID file > > > descriptor. > > > (See pidfd_open(2) for further information) > > > > > > The flags argument is reserved for future use; currently, this > > > argument must be specified as 0. > > > > > > RETURN VALUE > > > On success, process_mrelease() returns 0. On error, -1 is > > > returned and errno is set to indicate the error. > > > > > > ERRORS > > > EBADF pidfd is not a valid PID file descriptor. > > > > > > EAGAIN Failed to release part of the address space. > > > > > > EINTR The call was interrupted by a signal; see signal(7). > > > > > > EINVAL flags is not 0. > > > > > > EINVAL The memory of the task cannot be released because the > > > process is not exiting, the address space is shared > > > with another live process or there is a core dump in > > > progress. > > > > > > ENOSYS This system call is not supported, for example, without > > > MMU support built into Linux. > > > > > > ESRCH The target process does not exist (i.e., it has terminated > > > and been waited on). > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190411014353.113252-3-surenb@google.com/ > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/20201113173448.1863419-1-surenb@google.com/ > > > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/20201124053943.1684874-3-surenb@google.com/ > > > [4] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/20201223075712.GA4719@lst.de/ > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan > > > --- > > > changes in v7: > > > - Fixed pidfd_open misspelling, per Andrew Morton > > > - Fixed wrong task pinning after find_lock_task_mm() issue, per Michal Hocko > > > - Moved MMF_OOM_SKIP check before task_will_free_mem(), per Michal Hocko > > > > > > mm/oom_kill.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > > > index c729a4c4a1ac..a4d917b43c73 100644 > > > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > > > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > > > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > @@ -1141,3 +1142,75 @@ void pagefault_out_of_memory(void) > > > out_of_memory(&oc); > > > mutex_unlock(&oom_lock); > > > } > > > + > > > +SYSCALL_DEFINE2(process_mrelease, int, pidfd, unsigned int, flags) > > > +{ > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU > > > + struct mm_struct *mm = NULL; > > > + struct task_struct *task; > > > + struct task_struct *p; > > > + unsigned int f_flags; > > > + struct pid *pid; > > > + long ret = 0; > > > + > > > + if (flags) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + pid = pidfd_get_pid(pidfd, &f_flags); > > > + if (IS_ERR(pid)) > > > + return PTR_ERR(pid); > > > + > > > + task = get_pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID); > > > + if (!task) { > > > + ret = -ESRCH; > > > + goto put_pid; > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * If the task is dying and in the process of releasing its memory > > > + * then get its mm. > > > + */ > > > + p = find_lock_task_mm(task); > > > + if (!p) { > > > + ret = -ESRCH; > > > + goto put_pid; > > > + } > > > + if (task != p) { > > > + get_task_struct(p); > > > > > > Wouldn't we want to obtain the mm from p ? I thought that was the whole > > exercise of going via find_lock_task_mm(). > > Yes, that's what we do after checking task_will_free_mem(). > task_will_free_mem() requires us to hold task_lock and > find_lock_task_mm() achieves that ensuring that mm is still valid, but > it might return a task other than the original one. That's why we do > this dance with pinning the new task and unpinning the original one. > The same dance is performed in __oom_kill_process(). I was > contemplating adding a parameter to find_lock_task_mm() to request > this unpin/pin be done within that function but then decided to keep > it simple for now. > Did I address your question or did I misunderstand it? > One question I have is why mmget() and not mmgrab()? I see mmgrab() in oom_kill.c.