Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2023 10:51:19 +0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] mm, oom: Introduce bpf_oom_evaluate_task | From | Chuyi Zhou <> |
| |
Hello,
在 2023/8/17 10:07, Alexei Starovoitov 写道: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:13 AM Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com> wrote: >> static int oom_evaluate_task(struct task_struct *task, void *arg) >> { >> struct oom_control *oc = arg; >> @@ -317,6 +339,26 @@ static int oom_evaluate_task(struct task_struct *task, void *arg) >> if (!is_memcg_oom(oc) && !oom_cpuset_eligible(task, oc)) >> goto next; >> >> + /* >> + * If task is allocating a lot of memory and has been marked to be >> + * killed first if it triggers an oom, then select it. >> + */ >> + if (oom_task_origin(task)) { >> + points = LONG_MAX; >> + goto select; >> + } >> + >> + switch (bpf_oom_evaluate_task(task, oc)) { >> + case BPF_EVAL_ABORT: >> + goto abort; /* abort search process */ >> + case BPF_EVAL_NEXT: >> + goto next; /* ignore the task */ >> + case BPF_EVAL_SELECT: >> + goto select; /* select the task */ >> + default: >> + break; /* No BPF policy */ >> + } >> + > > I think forcing bpf prog to look at every task is going to be limiting > long term. > It's more flexible to invoke bpf prog from out_of_memory() > and if it doesn't choose a task then fallback to select_bad_process(). > I believe that's what Roman was proposing. > bpf can choose to iterate memcg or it might have some side knowledge > that there are processes that can be set as oc->chosen right away, > so it can skip the iteration.
IIUC, We may need some new bpf features if we want to iterating tasks/memcg in BPF, sush as: bpf_for_each_task bpf_for_each_memcg bpf_for_each_task_in_memcg ...
It seems we have some work to do first in the BPF side. Will these iterating features be useful in other BPF scenario except OOM Policy?
Thanks.
| |