Re: [PATCH] mm/oom_kill: simplify remaining RCU sections with guard(rcu)
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Thu Aug 13 2026 - 04:51:25 EST
On Thu 13-08-26 11:26:33, Ye Liu wrote:
> From: Ye Liu <liuye@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Replace the remaining manual rcu_read_lock()/rcu_read_unlock() pairs
> in oom_cpuset_eligible(), select_bad_process(), dump_tasks(),
> task_will_free_mem(), and __oom_kill_process() with guard(rcu)() for
> consistency and simpler control flow.
Could you use scoped_guard instead? While all these functions do not
perform anything pas the for loop this might change in the future and I
find it more obvious what the actual scope for the RCU is rather than
the full function one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ye Liu <liuye@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 15 +++++----------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 4b5c70aaece4..8bbb5ca00bb6 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static bool oom_cpuset_eligible(struct task_struct *start,
> bool ret = false;
> const nodemask_t *mask = oc->nodemask;
>
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + guard(rcu)();
> for_each_thread(start, tsk) {
> if (mask) {
> /*
> @@ -114,7 +114,6 @@ static bool oom_cpuset_eligible(struct task_struct *start,
> if (ret)
> break;
> }
> - rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -368,11 +367,10 @@ static void select_bad_process(struct oom_control *oc)
> else {
> struct task_struct *p;
>
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + guard(rcu)();
> for_each_process(p)
> if (oom_evaluate_task(p, oc))
> break;
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> }
>
> @@ -430,14 +428,13 @@ static void dump_tasks(struct oom_control *oc)
> struct task_struct *p;
> int i = 0;
>
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + guard(rcu)();
> for_each_process(p) {
> /* Avoid potential softlockup warning */
> if ((++i & 1023) == 0)
> touch_softlockup_watchdog();
> dump_task(p, oc);
> }
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> }
>
> @@ -894,7 +891,7 @@ static bool task_will_free_mem(struct task_struct *task)
> * are dying as well to make sure that a) nobody pins its mm and
> * b) the task is also reapable by the oom reaper.
> */
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + guard(rcu)();
> for_each_process(p) {
> if (!process_shares_mm(p, mm))
> continue;
> @@ -904,7 +901,6 @@ static bool task_will_free_mem(struct task_struct *task)
> if (!ret)
> break;
> }
> - rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -960,7 +956,7 @@ static void __oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *victim, const char *message)
> * That thread will now get access to memory reserves since it has a
> * pending fatal signal.
> */
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + guard(rcu)();
> for_each_process(p) {
> if (!process_shares_mm(p, mm))
> continue;
> @@ -982,7 +978,6 @@ static void __oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *victim, const char *message)
> continue;
> do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p, PIDTYPE_TGID);
> }
> - rcu_read_unlock();
>
> if (can_oom_reap)
> queue_oom_reaper(victim);
> --
> 2.25.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs