Messages in this thread | | | From | Waiman Long <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/oom_kill: show oom eligibility when displaying the current memory state of all tasks | Date | Fri, 11 Jun 2021 13:42:49 -0400 |
| |
On 6/11/21 1:19 PM, Aaron Tomlin wrote: > At the present time, when showing potential OOM victims, we do not > exclude tasks which already have MMF_OOM_SKIP set; it is possible that > the last OOM killable victim was already OOM killed, yet the OOM > reaper failed to reclaim memory and set MMF_OOM_SKIP. > This can be confusing/or perhaps even misleading, to the reader of the > OOM report. Now, we already unconditionally display a task's > oom_score_adj_min value that can be set to OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN which is > indicative of an "unkillable" task i.e. is not eligible. > > This patch provides a clear indication with regard to the OOM > eligibility of each displayed task. > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com> > --- > mm/oom_kill.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > index eefd3f5fde46..70781d681a6e 100644 > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > @@ -160,6 +160,27 @@ static inline bool is_sysrq_oom(struct oom_control *oc) > return oc->order == -1; > } > > +/** > + * is_task_eligible_oom - determine if and why a task cannot be OOM killed > + * @tsk: task to check > + * > + * Needs to be called with task_lock(). > + */ > +static const char * is_task_oom_eligible(struct task_struct *p) > +{ > + long adj; > + > + adj = (long)p->signal->oom_score_adj; > + if (adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN) > + return "no: oom score"; > + else if (test_bit(MMF_OOM_SKIP, &p->mm->flags) > + return "no: oom reaped"; > + else if (in_vfork(p)) > + return "no: in vfork"; > + else > + return "yes"; > +} > + > /* return true if the task is not adequate as candidate victim task. */ > static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p) > { > @@ -401,12 +422,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg) > return 0; > } > > - pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %s\n", > + pr_info("[%7d] %5d %5d %8lu %8lu %8ld %8lu %5hd %-15s %s\n", > task->pid, from_kuid(&init_user_ns, task_uid(task)), > task->tgid, task->mm->total_vm, get_mm_rss(task->mm), > mm_pgtables_bytes(task->mm), > get_mm_counter(task->mm, MM_SWAPENTS), > - task->signal->oom_score_adj, task->comm); > + task->signal->oom_score_adj, is_task_oom_eligible(task), > + task->comm); > task_unlock(task); > > return 0; > @@ -420,12 +442,13 @@ static int dump_task(struct task_struct *p, void *arg) > * memcg, not in the same cpuset, or bound to a disjoint set of mempolicy nodes > * are not shown. > * State information includes task's pid, uid, tgid, vm size, rss, > - * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, and name. > + * pgtables_bytes, swapents, oom_score_adj value, oom eligible status > + * and name. > */ > static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc) > { > pr_info("Tasks state (memory values in pages):\n"); > - pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj name\n"); > + pr_info("[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss pgtables_bytes swapents oom_score_adj oom eligible? name\n");
A minor nit:
"oom eligible?" has 13 characters. The field width is 15. Maybe you should pad 2 more spaces to make the proper alignment.
Cheers, Longman
| |