Re: [PATCH 3/6] staging: android/lowmemorykiller: Don't grabtasklist_lock

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:42:15PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:36:49AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:29:41PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > > Grabbing tasklist_lock has its disadvantages, i.e. it blocks
> > > process creation and destruction. If there are lots of processes,
> > > blocking doesn't sound as a great idea.
> > > 
> > > For LMK, it is sufficient to surround tasks list traverse with
> > > rcu_read_{,un}lock().
> > > 
> > > >From now on using force_sig() is not safe, as it can race with an
> > > already exiting task, so we use send_sig() now. As a downside, it
> > > won't kill PID namespace init processes, but that's not what we
> > > want anyway.
> > > 
> > > Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Are these last 4 patches independant of the first 2 and can be taken
> > through the staging tree now?
> 
> Yep, without the first two there is just a bit of sparse warnings.
> Not a big deal.

Ok, I'll take the last 4, the first 2 needs to go through some other
tree (-mm?)

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/