Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8CAC433FE for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 22:25:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235474AbiADWZF (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2022 17:25:05 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51566 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235466AbiADWZC (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2022 17:25:02 -0500 Received: from mail-yb1-xb2a.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D69CC061785 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 14:25:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2a.google.com with SMTP id j83so93613161ybg.2 for ; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 14:25:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=M1QBXQhRunHeAehYIycTouhYj3cWM9KC3mhyXs9mkLo=; b=o6v1LBQqqRQ1zjkCWy52ZvZ0ojpbkR7cq552qjmx+/nvTq0KeEc9jgIvIn5OXCyCw4 Wh18TNUQ1uRdDTNTa7GgXUsrFmDVynzlWfVfJaxwdtofFJffId8VrkGYZDle6e7UzHwr 9X+6zEXV396nLI1t3jmCR/DzYW25hLBvbl+c+hXlGDvwphF14U0K8bzyIm4wsWHJKGid 20qhKJAOv1YyhM1yl8kqN96nSoBLcOzC3hrI5hfA76i+tvYc2hkgSm2cY2C9VkMS1O4T OsOcE1YxbzzzMN3QpLkmsmSB+tln/Ux7x5l5fK/LBMDfVpxUZk9Q+9LKT051MpTA0J91 dhoA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M1QBXQhRunHeAehYIycTouhYj3cWM9KC3mhyXs9mkLo=; b=6hknOCvK322LXDR9ha0VZWb5X/rfaUOSu1M2zLhDBolMdpfcZzLWg3pHwIvuo42f1k KcuuRs6BxS7a5cCtEGvJCiKWS34I/fc3CnWWl+w6JyAbkO4f1FUERJBVIs2jZHPw5/j2 9UeuoAP9QNfFUO3VryROhGGazflc0NcgglT7KG637MyEu5BkiXBISZj/1e51BAWxvlP+ F1ZBJ3cCGFcyicrHrqam0zYQQ87mvp6Vnlf6EiAU5SRTZ8nWk3o0i1AuOxUHUbQyjXTG +dOPZSud8mKtyvd4pYqZKPlGL/0b04DpfsvHyyuosYtcJ849yxOkwSMtVpQpea9aLX3a RznQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533BKsgE4J5ezZbFkHTqwfRiPuf5UkTNKppEk8Pfxn6ENImhrPX2 2dlmc5H7jUGG/FoPsNKZKLV9BeTL1U4sbGLczKRgiA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzq5ogUegZNf9ozNumlO/uYc6UTXT6bPaLKzFqUs0x82NmJYMfbRfSmN21Zgp2e6BfQHjNyHZidvdhDPxj0jjg= X-Received: by 2002:a25:d109:: with SMTP id i9mr49121946ybg.1.1641335101172; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 14:25:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <35c340a6-96f-28a0-2b7b-2f9fbddc01f@google.com> In-Reply-To: <35c340a6-96f-28a0-2b7b-2f9fbddc01f@google.com> From: Suren Baghdasaryan Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 14:24:50 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/3] mm: drop MMF_OOM_SKIP from exit_mmap To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Matthew Wilcox , Roman Gushchin , Rik van Riel , Minchan Kim , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , Christian Brauner , Christoph Hellwig , Oleg Nesterov , David Hildenbrand , Jann Horn , Shakeel Butt , Andy Lutomirski , Christian Brauner , Florian Weimer , Jan Engelhardt , Tim Murray , Vlastimil Babka , 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 Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 1:16 PM Hugh Dickins wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Jan 2022, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 30-12-21 09:29:40, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 12:24 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > > It would be really great to make unlock_range oom reaper aware IMHO. > > > > > > What exactly do you envision? Say unlock_range() knows that it's > > > racing with __oom_reap_task_mm() and that calling follow_page() is > > > unsafe without locking, what should it do? > > > > My original plan was to make the page lock conditional and use > > trylocking from the oom reaper (aka lockless context). It is OK to > > simply bail out and leave some mlocked memory behind if there is a > > contention on a specific page. The overall objective is to free as much > > memory as possible, not all of it. > > > > IIRC Hugh was not a fan of this approach and he has mentioned that the > > lock might not be even really needed and that the area would benefit > > from a clean up rather than oom reaper specific hacks. I do tend to > > agree with that. I just never managed to find any spare time for that > > though and heavily mlocked oom victims tend to be really rare. > > I forget when that was, and what I had in mind at that time. > But yes, by now I am very sure that munlocking needs a cleanup. > > And I do have that cleanup (against a much older tree), but never > the time to rebase or post or shepherd it through N revisions. How old was that tree? > > It was 22 files changed, 464 insertions, 706 deletions: > which is too much to help with this immediate oom reaper question. > > I'd better not drive this discussion further off-course; but it pains > me to see munlock_vma_pages obstructing, knowing there's a better way. > > I wonder: what if I were to steal time and promise to post a > rebased series against 5.17-rc1 or rc2: not support it thereafter, > but might there be someone to pick it up and shepherd it through? > But there's no answer to that, without you seeing what it's like. I would be interested in taking a look and see if it can be upstreamed and supported without bugging you too much. Thanks, Suren. > > Hugh