lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/3] mm: drop MMF_OOM_SKIP from exit_mmap
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 8:47 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu 09-12-21 08:24:04, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 1:12 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Do we want this on top?
> >
> > As we discussed in this thread
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/YY4snVzZZZYhbigV@dhcp22.suse.cz,
> > __oom_reap_task_mm in exit_mmap allows oom-reaper/process_mrelease to
> > unmap pages in parallel with exit_mmap without blocking each other.
> > Removal of __oom_reap_task_mm from exit_mmap prevents this parallelism
> > and has a negative impact on performance. So the conclusion of that
> > thread I thought was to keep that part. My understanding is that we
> > also wanted to remove MMF_OOM_SKIP as a follow-up patch but
> > __oom_reap_task_mm would stay.
>
> OK, then we were talking past each other, I am afraid. I really wanted
> to get rid of this oom specific stuff from exit_mmap. It was there out
> of necessity. With a proper locking we can finally get rid of the crud.
> As I've said previously oom reaping has never been a hot path.
>
> If we really want to optimize this path then I would much rather see a
> generic solution which would allow to move the write lock down after
> unmap_vmas. That would require oom reaper to be able to handle mlocked
> memory.

Ok, let's work on that and when that's done we can get rid of the oom
stuff in exit_mmap. I'll look into this over the weekend and will
likely be back with questions.
Thanks!

> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-12-09 18:08    [W:0.075 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site