[PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig()

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Oleg, I parsed your mention mean following patch, correct?


===========================================
Oleg pointed out oom_kill.c has force_sig() abuse. force_sig() mean 
ignore signal mask. but SIGKILL itself is not maskable.
So, we can use send_sig() sefely.

Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 mm/oom_kill.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index e7d3a5d..599f977 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ static int __oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem)
 	p->rt.time_slice = HZ;
 	set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);
 
-	force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
+	send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1);
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
1.6.5.2



--
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/