Re: [patch] oom: give current access to memory reserves if it hasbeen killed
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Fri Apr 02 2010 - 15:17:09 EST
On 04/02, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > David, you continue to ignore my arguments ;) select_bad_process()
> > must not filter out the tasks with ->mm == NULL.
> I'm not ignoring your arguments, I think you're ignoring what I'm
> responding to.
Ah, sorry, I misunderstood your replies.
> I prefer to keep oom_badness() to be a positive range as
> it always has been (and /proc/pid/oom_score has always used an unsigned
Yes, I thought about /proc/pid/oom_score, but imho this is minor issue.
We can s/%lu/%ld/ though, or just report 0 if oom_badness() returns -1.
> so I disagree that we need to change oom_badness() to return
> anything other than 0 for such tasks. We need to filter them explicitly
> in select_bad_process() instead, so please do this there.
The problem is, we need task_lock() to pin ->mm. Or, we can change
find_lock_task_mm() to do get_task_mm() and return mm_struct *.
But then oom_badness() (and proc_oom_score!) needs much more changes,
it needs the new "struct mm_struct *mm" argument which is not necessarily
equal to p->mm.
So, I can't agree.
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/