Re: [PATCH 2/5] Revert "oom: give the dying task a higher priority"

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Hi

> @@ -434,9 +452,17 @@ static int oom_kill_task(struct task_struct *p)
>                 K(get_mm_counter(p->mm, MM_FILEPAGES)));
>         task_unlock(p);
>  
> -       p->rt.time_slice = HZ; <<---- THIS
> +
>         set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);
>         force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
> +
> +       /*
> +        * We give our sacrificial lamb high priority and access to
> +        * all the memory it needs. That way it should be able to
> +        * exit() and clear out its resources quickly...
> +        */
> +       boost_dying_task_prio(p, mem);
> +
>         return 0;
>  }
> 
> At that time, I thought that routine is meaningless in non-RT scheduler.
> So I Cced Peter but don't get the answer.
> I just want to confirm it.
> 
> Do you still think it's meaningless? 

In short, yes.


> so you remove it when you revert 93b43fa5508?
> Then, this isn't just revert patch but revert + killing meaningless code patch.

If you want, I'd like to rename a patch title. That said, we can't revert
93b43fa5508 simple cleanly, several patches depend on it. therefore I
reverted it manualy. and at that time, I don't want to resurrect
meaningless logic. anyway it's no matter. Luis is preparing new patches.
therefore we will get the same end result. :)



--
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/