From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Cc: noahm@csail.mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: OOM problems with 2.6.11-rc4
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:21:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050316142114.3f853d85.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050316183701.GB21597@opteron.random>
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 04:04:35AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > + if (!reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab &&
> > > + zone->pages_scanned >= (zone->nr_active +
> > > + zone->nr_inactive) * 4)
> > > zone->all_unreclaimable = 1;
> >
> > That might not change anything because we clear ->all_unreclaimable in
> > free_page_bulk(). [..]
>
> Really? free_page_bulk is called inside shrink_slab, and so it's overwritten
> later by all_unreclaimable. Otherwise how could all_unreclaimable be set
> in the first place if a single page freed by shrink_slab would be enough
> to clear it?
>
> shrink_slab
> all_unreclaimable = 0
> zone->pages_scanned >= (zone->nr_active [..]
> all_unreclaimable = 1
>
> try_to_free_pages
> all_unreclaimable == 1
> oom
Spose so.
> I also considering changing shrink_slab to return a progress retval, but
> then I noticed I could get away with a one liner fix ;).
>
> Your fix is better but it should be mostly equivalent in pratcie. I
> liked the dontrylock not risking to go oom, the one liner couldn't
> handle that ;).
It has a problem. If ZONE_DMA is really, really oom, kswapd will sit there
freeing up ZONE_NORMAL slab objects and not setting all_unreclaimable.
We'll end up using tons of CPU and reclaiming lots of slab in response to a
ZONE_DMA oom.
I'm thinking that the most accurate way of fixing this and also avoiding
the "we're fragmenting slab but not actually freeing pages yet" problem is
- change task_struct->reclaim_state so that it has an array of booleans
(one per zone)
- in kmem_cache_free, work out what zone the object corresponds to and
set the boolean in current->reclaim_state which corresponds to that zone.
- in balance_pgdat(), inspect this zone's boolean to see if we're making
any forward progress with slab freeing.
Probably we can do the work in kmem_cache_free() at the place where we
spill the slab magazine, to optimise things a bit. I haven't looked at it.
But that has a problem too. Some other task might be freeing objects into
the relevant zone instead of this one.
So maybe a better approach would be to add a "someone freed something"
counter to the zone structure. That would be incremented whenever anyone
frees a page for a slab object. Then in balance_pdgat we take a look at
that before and after performing the LRU and slab scans. If it
incremented, dont' set all_unreclaimable. And still keep the
free_pages_bulk code there as the code which takes us _out_ of the
all_unreclaimable state.
It's tricky.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-16 22:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-15 20:44 Noah Meyerhans
2005-03-15 21:56 ` Sean
2005-03-15 22:12 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-15 23:46 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-18 16:12 ` Noah Meyerhans
2005-04-13 13:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-04-14 16:56 ` Noah Meyerhans
2005-03-16 0:31 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-03-16 11:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-03-16 12:04 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-16 12:15 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-16 18:37 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-03-16 22:21 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2005-03-23 19:53 ` OOM problems on 2.6.12-rc1 with many fsx tests Mingming Cao
2005-03-23 22:49 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-23 23:13 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-03-23 23:20 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-23 23:26 ` Andries Brouwer
2005-03-23 23:30 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-03-23 23:42 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-23 23:49 ` [Ext2-devel] " Badari Pulavarty
2005-03-24 1:49 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-03-24 2:00 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-25 21:56 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-25 22:11 ` [Ext2-devel] " Badari Pulavarty
2005-03-27 0:23 ` Mingming Cao
2005-03-27 19:22 ` Mingming Cao
2005-03-27 20:06 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-03-27 20:17 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-03-26 0:17 ` Dave Jones
2005-03-26 0:20 ` [Ext2-devel] " Badari Pulavarty
2005-04-04 1:35 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-04 16:50 ` Mingming Cao
2005-04-04 20:04 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-04 20:24 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-04-04 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-05 17:04 ` [Ext2-devel] " Mingming Cao
2005-04-06 1:23 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-12 12:50 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-04-05 16:44 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-03-16 12:23 ` OOM problems with 2.6.11-rc4 Andrew Morton
2005-03-16 12:30 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050316142114.3f853d85.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=noahm@csail.mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome