Re: [PATCH v2] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending

From: David Rientjes
Date: Fri Dec 08 2017 - 16:02:29 EST


On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:

> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal
> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal
> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process
> since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending
> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected
> terminates this loop early.
>

I've proposed a similar patch in the past, but for a check on TIF_MEMDIE,
which would today be a tsk_is_oom_victim(current), since we had observed
lengthy stalls in reclaim that would have been prevented if the oom victim
had exited out, returned back to the page allocator, allocated with
ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS, and proceeded to quickly exit.

I'm not sure that all fatal_signal_pending() tasks should get the same
treatment, but I understand the point that the task is killed and should
free memory when it fully exits. How much memory is unknown.

> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> V2:
> Sergey Senozhatsky:
> - Fix missing parentheses
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index c02c850ea349..28e4bdc72c16 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -486,6 +486,13 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
> .memcg = memcg,
> };
>
> + /*
> + * We are about to die and free our memory.
> + * Stop shrinking which might delay signal handling.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current)))
> + break;
> +
> /*
> * If kernel memory accounting is disabled, we ignore
> * SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE flag and call all shrinkers