diff options
author | Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> | 2015-06-25 02:58:23 +0300 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2015-06-25 03:49:45 +0300 |
commit | c2b42d3cadbffbf5117ccdbcb3a2fc47c0d59bae (patch) | |
tree | 499feeac186fae24e36057206b51f3ca1a0bc016 /samples/bpf | |
parent | f4b90b70b7a4f5c29c442399ffd531332356e1f5 (diff) | |
download | linux-c2b42d3cadbffbf5117ccdbcb3a2fc47c0d59bae.tar.xz |
memcg: convert mem_cgroup->under_oom from atomic_t to int
memcg->under_oom tracks whether the memcg is under OOM conditions and is
an atomic_t counter managed with mem_cgroup_[un]mark_under_oom(). While
atomic_t appears to be simple synchronization-wise, when used as a
synchronization construct like here, it's trickier and more error-prone
due to weak memory ordering rules, especially around atomic_read(), and
false sense of security.
For example, both non-trivial read sites of memcg->under_oom are a bit
problematic although not being actually broken.
* mem_cgroup_oom_register_event()
It isn't explicit what guarantees the memory ordering between event
addition and memcg->under_oom check. This isn't broken only because
memcg_oom_lock is used for both event list and memcg->oom_lock.
* memcg_oom_recover()
The lockless test doesn't have any explanation why this would be
safe.
mem_cgroup_[un]mark_under_oom() are very cold paths and there's no point
in avoiding locking memcg_oom_lock there. This patch converts
memcg->under_oom from atomic_t to int, puts their modifications under
memcg_oom_lock and documents why the lockless test in
memcg_oom_recover() is safe.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'samples/bpf')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions