Re: [PATCH 1/4] oom: move oom_adj to signal_struct

[Oleg Nesterov]

Sorry for late reply. And sorry, I didn't read these patches carefully yet,
probably missed something...

On 08/04, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -34,6 +34,31 @@ int sysctl_oom_dump_tasks;
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(zone_scan_lock);
>  /* #define DEBUG */
>
> +int get_oom_adj(struct task_struct *tsk)

is it used outside oom_kill.c ?

> +{
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	int oom_adj = OOM_DISABLE;
> +
> +	if (tsk->mm && lock_task_sighand(tsk, &flags)) {

Minor nit. _Afaics_, unlike proc, oom_kill.c never needs lock_task_sighand()
to access ->signal->oom_adj.

If the task was found under tasklist_lock by for_each_process/do_each_thread
it must have the valid ->signal != NULL and it can't go away.


With these patches I think mm-introduce-proc-pid-oom_adj_child.patch should
be dropped. This is good ;)

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/