On Tue, 11 Jul 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:

> This?
> ---
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 5dc0ff22d567..e155d1d8064f 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -470,11 +470,14 @@ static bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, 
> struct mm_struct *mm)
>  {
>       struct mmu_gather tlb;
>       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> -     bool ret = true;
>  
>       if (!down_read_trylock(&mm->mmap_sem))
>               return false;
>  
> +     /* There is nothing to reap so bail out without signs in the log */
> +     if (!mm->mmap)
> +             goto unlock;
> +
>       /*
>        * Tell all users of get_user/copy_from_user etc... that the content
>        * is no longer stable. No barriers really needed because unmapping
> @@ -508,9 +511,10 @@ static bool __oom_reap_task_mm(struct task_struct *tsk, 
> struct mm_struct *mm)
>                       K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_ANONPAGES)),
>                       K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_FILEPAGES)),
>                       K(get_mm_counter(mm, MM_SHMEMPAGES)));
> +unlock:
>       up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>  
> -     return ret;
> +     return true;
>  }
>  
>  #define MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES 10

Yes, this folded in with the original RFC patch appears to work better 
with light testing.

However, I think MAX_OOM_REAP_RETRIES and/or the timeout of HZ/10 needs to 
be increased as well to address the issue that Tetsuo pointed out.  The 
oom reaper shouldn't be required to do any work unless it is resolving a 
livelock, and that scenario should be relatively rare.  The oom killer 
being a natural ultra slow path, I think it would be justifiable to wait 
longer or retry more times than simply 1 second before declaring that 
reaping is not possible.  It reduces the likelihood of additional oom 
killing.

Reply via email to