From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: Lockup in wait_transaction_locked under memory pressure Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:16:30 +0200 Message-ID: <20150629091629.GC28471@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <558BE96E.7080101@kyup.com> <20150625115025.GD17237@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20150625133138.GH14324@thunk.org> <558C06F7.9050406@kyup.com> <20150625140510.GI17237@dhcp22.suse.cz> <558C116E.2070204@kyup.com> <20150625151842.GK17237@dhcp22.suse.cz> <558C1DCE.1010705@kyup.com> <20150629083243.GB28471@dhcp22.suse.cz> <55910AEA.2030205@kyup.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Theodore Ts'o , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Marian Marinov To: Nikolay Borisov Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38702 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751159AbbF2JQb (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 05:16:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55910AEA.2030205@kyup.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon 29-06-15 12:07:54, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 06/29/2015 11:32 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 25-06-15 18:27:10, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 06/25/2015 06:18 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>> On Thu 25-06-15 17:34:22, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > >>>> On 06/25/2015 05:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>>>> On Thu 25-06-15 16:49:43, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > >>>>> [...] > >>>>>> How would you advise to rectify such situation? > >>>>> > >>>>> As I've said. Check the oom victim traces and see if it is holding any > >>>>> of those locks. > >>>> > >>>> As mentioned previously all OOM traces are identical to the one I've > >>>> sent - OOM being called form the page fault path. > >>> > >>> By identical you mean that all of them kill the same task? Or just that > >>> the path is same (which wouldn't be surprising as this is the only path > >>> which triggers memcg oom killer)? > >> > >> The code path is the same, the tasks being killed are different > > > > Is the OOM killer triggered only for a singe memcg or others misbehave > > as well? > > Generally OOM would be triggered for whichever memcg runs out of > resources but so far I've only observed that the D state issue happens > in a single containers. It is not clear whether it is the OOM memcg which has tasks in the D state. Anyway I think it all smells like one memcg is throttling others on another shared resource - journal in your case. > However, this in turn might affect other processes if they try to > sleep on the same jbd2 journal . Sure, if the journal is shared then this is an inherent problem. Memcg restrictions can easily cause priority inheritance problems as Ted has already mentioned. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs