RFR: 8292083: Detected container memory limit may exceed physical machine memory [v19]

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 10:35:18 GMT, Jonathan Dowland <jdowland at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> We discovered some systems configured with cgroups v1 which report a bogus container memory limit value which is above the physical memory of the host. OpenJDK then calculates flags such as InitialHeapSize based on this invalid value; this can be larger than the available memory which can result in the OS terminating the process due to OOM.
>> 
>> hotspot's container awareness attempts to sanity check the limit value by ensuring it's below `_unlimited_memory = (LONG_MAX / os::vm_page_size()) * os::vm_page_size()`, but that still leaves a large range of potential invalid values between physical RAM and that ceiling value.
>> 
>> Cgroups V1 in particular returns an uninitialised value for the memory limit when one has not been explicitly set. Cgroups v2 does not suffer the same problem: however, it's possible for any value to be set for the max memory, including values exceeding the available physical memory, in either v1 or v2.
>> 
>> This fixes the problem in two places. Further work may be required in the area of Java metrics / MXBeans. I'd also look again at whether the existing ceiling value `_unlimited_memory` serves any useful purpose. I personally don't feel those improvements should hold up this fix.
>
> Jonathan Dowland has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Address style nit

GHA reports that 1/9 tests in [linux-x86 / test (hs/tier1 gc)](https://github.com/jmtd/jdk/runs/7993442989?check_suite_focus=true) failed. Digging into the logs, this was gc/metaspace/TestMetaspacePerfCounters.java#Shenandoah-32, which seems unrelated to these changes. I've just ran this one locally and it passed for me.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9880